LadyM Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 This mod doesn't use the NPC orientation settings in NG at all. It only uses the PC orientation setting. Try setting the PC to Gay in NG, and then set this mod to 'match' orientation. Scrambler is a default rapist (lvl 2 Stalker). Lt. Hayes is excluded for some reason I've long forgotten. I do set the PC and male NPCs to gay. So I bet Driver Nephi and Cook-Cook are serial rapsists too? They really make THE very best lovers for a female PC. I wish they'd do it for my gay guys too!! Can you please check on Lt Hayes? He's my most favorite of all but he doesn't do anything on his own or with your mod. I'm an avid sims player and really, your mod has brought in that 'sims' feel of having relationships with these NPCs!
t3589 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Posted June 11, 2015 I do set the PC and male NPCs to gay. So I bet Driver Nephi and Cook-Cook are serial rapsists too? They really make THE very best lovers for a female PC. I wish they'd do it for my gay guys too!! Can you please check on Lt Hayes? He's my most favorite of all but he doesn't do anything on his own or with your mod. I'm an avid sims player and really, your mod has brought in that 'sims' feel of having relationships with these NPCs! That's what I'm saying. You cannot set the NPC orientation explicitly, due to the persuasion system. NPCs determine their own orientation based on a number of factors, and SexoutNG does not determine their orientation with this mod. Your choices are basically: a. Conduct a 'friendly dialog' relationship to try and persuade the NPC to give your orientation a try (in the beta this is refined, quite stale in the alpha). b. Find one of the vanilla appointed default gay NPCs and have a relationship with them. c. Create an esp that sets up NPCs how you want them set. d. Reset the NPC until you luck into gayness. As far as Hayes... The beta will switch from an exclusion based system to an inclusion based system. In other words, you'll be able to add whoever you want selectively. Then over time, I will auto include only those NPCs that either I or feedback have confirmed are capable of a 'mod stable' relationship. This will leave it open for players to try adding whoever they want, with the understanding that they are testing unsupported NPCs, and any problems/inconsistencies will require feedback to be addressed.
LadyM Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 If you have a beta you're testing now, I'd love to help. Is there any way I can read how gay an NPC is?
t3589 Posted June 11, 2015 Author Posted June 11, 2015 If you have a beta you're testing now, I'd love to help. Is there any way I can read how gay an NPC is? Well I have a beta I'm 'writing' now. lol But damn good of you to offer. As soon as I get it to where it actually does something I'll begin posting test copies. I've got a majority of the functions in, but I still need to hash out dialog placeholders and a few packages. I'm not sure I understand the question. Gay is bool in this mod. Oh wait I think I know what you mean. You mean for persuading them? If so, then yes it's based on conviction, but it isn't easy in the alpha copy. In the new one it will be based on a number of factors and new attributes like sexual curiosity, promiscuity, will power, and conviction. For the alpha you could try this: ref.NX_SetEVFl "SODRTL:Gay" 1 Might work.
LadyM Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 If you have a beta you're testing now, I'd love to help. Is there any way I can read how gay an NPC is? Well I have a beta I'm 'writing' now. lol But damn good of you to offer. As soon as I get it to where it actually does something I'll begin posting test copies. For the alpha you could try this: ref.NX_SetEVFl "SODRTL:Gay" 1 Might work. I'm here to help, when you're ready, give me a shout and I'll come a runnin'! This mod has just revitalized the game for me along with the sexout animins. You're on to something here and I support you totally. I'll give that command a try when I get back into game. Thank you! I tried the code but got some errors. I tried it with and without the quotes.
t3589 Posted June 12, 2015 Author Posted June 12, 2015 I tried the code but got some errors. I tried it with and without the quotes. You have to know the ref you're trying to set. thisneedstobearealreference.NX_SetEVFl "SODRTL:Gay" 1
LadyM Posted June 12, 2015 Posted June 12, 2015 I tried the code but got some errors. I tried it with and without the quotes. You have to know the ref you're trying to set. thisneedstobearealreference.NX_SetEVFl "SODRTL:Gay" 1 Ok, tried it with Lt Hayes ref # first then Scrambler's, neither one worked. Now these numbers are the reference not base IDs. I use these numbers to set them essential.
t3589 Posted June 12, 2015 Author Posted June 12, 2015 Ok, tried it with Lt Hayes ref # first then Scrambler's, neither one worked. Now these numbers are the reference not base IDs. I use these numbers to set them essential. Yeah you can't do it like that from the console. Hayes won't work because he is in the banned list. Even though the new one will allow you to add him, it still won't let you pose them as gay (in game). The current random chance of an NPC being gay (one that the vanilla game does not explicitly peg as gay), is roughly 1 in every 10 NPCs. So with the beta you'll still be in the same boat. Give me some time to work out this new copy. I plan on releasing a template esp that demonstrates how to set up NPCs as a modder. You should be able to edit it like a config file, stick any actor ref you like into it, and set them up to your liking. Then you could release your esp as a preset profile. Others may prefer your preset version of the NPC over the systems random settings.
LadyM Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Hayes won't work because he is in the banned list. Even though the new one will allow you to add him, it still won't let you pose them as gay (in game). The current random chance of an NPC being gay (one that the vanilla game does not explicitly peg as gay), is roughly 1 in every 10 NPCs. So with the beta you'll still be in the same boat. Give me some time to work out this new copy. I plan on releasing a template esp that demonstrates how to set up NPCs as a modder. You should be able to edit it like a config file, stick any actor ref you like into it, and set them up to your liking. Then you could release your esp as a preset profile. Others may prefer your preset version of the NPC over the systems random settings. This is indeed exciting! Is Hayes banned because he walks from Primm to Camp Forlorn Hope? I bet the same is with Sgt McGee who accompanies him. I notice their stat system is different too, unban them! LOL I did get a Control Freak Mode almost immediately with Gannon so the game based M/M works fine. He's still not as receptive as Scrambler, Driver Nephi and Cook-Cook. Hell, Cook-Cook can't even talk to you, it's all done through the prompts which is why your mod is so awesome! But they date, have plenty of sex and go for a lot of walks that result in sex, I'd say so far those 3 are my favorites--serial rapists.
OneWayVector Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Originally I thought it would be a nice idea to allow the player to act as the messenger for NPC to NPC interaction; either by delivering letters, rumours, direct talking etc... The idea that the player can make or break relations by carrying out or even better never delivering messages can allow for tangled messes! I came to the conclusion that the vanilla game has already determined any NPC to NPC relationships by the time the PC arrives in the world. So I probably won't be doing that. What I mean by NPC to NPC is the interactions between 2 or more NPCs with which the PC is in a current relationship. Or in other words, the application of the PC to NPC relationship tracking to NPCs that the PC has brought together by way of their relationship. I'm imagining scenarios like: - The PC talks their girlfriend into a 3way, and as a result, their girlfriend falls for the other NPC, and begins cheating on the PC behind their back. - The PC can't take xNPC anywhere because they're always starting fights with NPCs who are checking the PC out. - The PCs boyfriend takes them on a date and keeps staring at the waitresses tits during dinner. The main idea being to give the NPC the same capability to threaten the relationship that the PC has. You mention delivering messages, which brings me to radio communications. If I can pull it off, I would like to have some way to be able communicate at a distance. For this I imagine: - Jealous/Horny/Lonely/Crazy NPCs who pester the PC with calls wanting to know where they are, what they're doing, when they'll be back, etc. - Crazy NPCs, who, if you don't radio them and check in they come looking for you at the most inconvenient times. - Checking in with NPCs over the radio to mitigate longer absences. - Patrons who radio the PC to make prostitution appointments. Just a few ideas I've been entertaining. Radio Messages, for long range communication but with some aspect of the temporal nature of communicating in something like Game Time. I would consider it actually very possible if you split it in Three parts: 1> A Notification System 2> A Contacts Menu 3> A Pseudo Actor, Dialogue by Proxy -- 1> Notification (Telephone Rings!) Entry: Pseudo / Equipable Item that runs a script in GameMode (A HeadSet?) Script: Checks for messages every Notification Period second and displays on the top right-hand corner of the HUD where the contact is coming from. Using Game Effect Messages with pre-defined text with a fade-out period of 3-5 seconds. All notifications should be displayed within a defined period that should exist independently of TimeScale. Example: a Notification Period of 25-60 seconds to give around 10 nodes to register their message in GameMode and around 10 seconds for the player to respond to a single contact within that Period. Purpose: When Equipped in GameMode, it allows for the player to accept incoming contacts when they are ready to talk, instead of in combat when they are quite busy beating others. The Notifications are of Game Time and when not equipped there will still be attempts to contact the Player Character but by default result in missed contact notification. The Issue of TimeScale becomes very important, where there must be a tolerance to what is an acceptable TimeScale. (1 to 60 would be a fair range) Define: How long does a Notification Period Last in GameTime and Real time? How long do each message within a Notification Period last before fading out? What is a valid TimeScale range before this system does not work? What are the consequences of expired Notifications when Equipped and when Not Equipped? -- 2> Contacts Menu (Who Do You Call?) Entry: Pseudo Item to call a Menu within MenuMode (Tune HeadSet?) Script: Using a defined list of Contact Nodes the player can select which one in MenuMode to initiate a Dialogue. If a contact is chosen then all other contacts are cleared within the notification period. Purpose: When invoked, this acts as a contact list so that the player can determine where they can direct their dialogue. With each radio node, there should be a FormList of possible contacts. The List of possible contacts should be people of whom the player had some meaningful relationship and that Player / Player Character allow specifically their contact details. A FormList for adding and managing all the Contact Nodes within the list could assist in expanding this system if there are new vast Lands to explore. This could be done later when the system is up and working; at least in a smaller scale. -- 3> Pseudo Actor, Dialogue by Proxy Entry: Following on from the Player Selecting a radio communication contact node... Script: Invoke a dialogue with an Actor (Generic Male / Female / Creature?), Invisible or otherwise that share the same variables of the original Actor. Any Changes by the end of the conversation should be applied to the original Actor variables. Purpose: Moving Actors around the world is not feasible, but that does not matter. All that matters are that their variables change as if they were making the conversation. With the addition of copying all the variables between actors it should be feasible. Creating an Actor in the WorldSpace when talking could be a problem if there are no valid spaces to talk to the character within the Current Cell. If it is possible to initiate conversation with a character outside of the visible cell (but within the game defined cell), we have a similar effect. If All Else fails ... The Mojave Express can be the mailbox that everyone needs... ============== Looking forward to the new changes!
BoondockSaint Posted June 19, 2015 Posted June 19, 2015 Just a quick heads up. I'm about halfway thru the beta release which is coming along nicely (rebuilt from the ground up as a single esm). Tons of changes...(more cool stuff) Awesome. I'll start a new character when the beta is released. Cool!
t3589 Posted June 19, 2015 Author Posted June 19, 2015 (edited) Awesome. I'll start a new character when the beta is released. Cool! It's getting there. Looking very very slick. Just finished the framework on a new dating system a bit ago. This will be a brand new mod. I've made numerous improvements over the alpha already. Including group activities, advanced arguments, prolonged conversations, detailed item trading, ledgered wealth/debt tracking, detailed responses to rumors and moods, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. My favorite change so far is that the separation between incompatibles and compatible is now a very thin line. ie. Incompatibles are no longer walled off and now process identically to compatibles for the most part. They now have full stats and can exhibit the full range of compatible moods and opinions. This should allow expansion to platonic friendships. I could go on for days. More to come. EDIT: Speaking of new characters. I've been play testing so far with a Level 29 PC from the same save as the alpha, without a hitch. Just turned off the alpha and turned on the beta and have yet to have a single need to clean save or start a new game. Granted all the alpha data is gone, but still. Making a new toon is painful and it seemed to be a theme with the alpha copy. Edited June 19, 2015 by t3589
ljacquard Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Just want to say that I am following this from afar for now (currently taken with my TS3 modding/playthrough, please don't ask), but anticipate even more fun with your new mod than I've had with your "alpha" version (if that's possible). Really excited here. I might just return to FNV sooner than I had planned, just to help with the testing. Thank you for your hard work!
t3589 Posted June 20, 2015 Author Posted June 20, 2015 Just want to say that I am following this from afar for now (currently taken with my TS3 modding/playthrough, please don't ask), but anticipate even more fun with your new mod than I've had with your "alpha" version (if that's possible). Really excited here. I might just return to FNV sooner than I had planned, just to help with the testing. Thank you for your hard work! It's coming along. Just started working on a new dance system. Finished up most of the basic relationship dialog placeholders last night. Before that I finished up a new dating system that is still untested. Still, it will be a bit so don't expect anything 'playable' too soon. I may begin releasing copies of the incomplete progress just so folks can get familiar with the way it works. I haven't even started on any feature related to sex yet. So it's rather one sided atm. No sweat. I enjoy it.
BruceWayne Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Awesome. I'll start a new character when the beta is released. Cool! It's getting there. Looking very very slick. Just finished the framework on a new dating system a bit ago. This will be a brand new mod. I've made numerous improvements over the alpha already. Including group activities, advanced arguments, prolonged conversations, detailed item trading, ledgered wealth/debt tracking, detailed responses to rumors and moods, and that's just the tip of the iceberg. My favorite change so far is that the separation between incompatibles and compatible is now a very thin line. ie. Incompatibles are no longer walled off and now process identically to compatibles for the most part. They now have full stats and can exhibit the full range of compatible moods and opinions. This should allow expansion to platonic friendships. I could go on for days. More to come. EDIT: Speaking of new characters. I've been play testing so far with a Level 29 PC from the same save as the alpha, without a hitch. Just turned off the alpha and turned on the beta and have yet to have a single need to clean save or start a new game. Granted all the alpha data is gone, but still. Making a new toon is painful and it seemed to be a theme with the alpha copy. Are you saying that I can start a game with the alpha and switch to the beta mid-game (without issues)? I can live with "starting the mod over", but I wouldn't want to start a new game again. I've played for a couple of hours and have to say that I enjoy the mod very much, since last I've played a year ago. I haven't always paid attention to this thread, so some mechanics still elude me, but I think I'll learn them as I go. Anyway, I'm excited for the update!
t3589 Posted June 20, 2015 Author Posted June 20, 2015 Are you saying that I can start a game with the alpha and switch to the beta mid-game (without issues)? I can live with "starting the mod over", but I wouldn't want to start a new game again. I've played for a couple of hours and have to say that I enjoy the mod very much, since last I've played a year ago. I haven't always paid attention to this thread, so some mechanics still elude me, but I think I'll learn them as I go. Anyway, I'm excited for the update! Lol. Well, I'm saying that so far. Haven't had to clean save or start a new game while spot testing yet. The alpha is a fairly complicated mess. It's kind of like a car that's been modified to perform like a truck, and then modified again into a hotrod, without taking the truck modifications off... If that makes sense. It's more or less a result of heavy experimentation in all directions. This new one is much more simplistic and straightforward. As they say, simplicity is the offspring of complexity.
BruceWayne Posted June 20, 2015 Posted June 20, 2015 Ha! Well, that sounds very good. Meanwhile, I think I've run into a bug?! I've enabled debug and it seems like I didn't end an activity right. Female PC, straight, friend activity (eat) with Sunny in GS. I've left after a while, since nothing happened after I've exhausted all of the option multiple times. I assumed that the activity ends itself after a while, but it looks like Sunny thinks it is still ongoing. The console gives two different types of Abort messages if I try to do stuff with other NPCs. The scan debug says that they are "locked" because an activity is still ongoing. I removed the tokens from this mod from Sunny, which snapped her out of eat mode dialogue, but she is still eating and the console messages for the others haven't changed. Is there a way to end an activity manually (either through dialogue or console)? And if not, how can I end an activity (or know that an activity has ended) so this won't repeat itself?
t3589 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Posted June 21, 2015 (edited) Ha! Well, that sounds very good. Meanwhile, I think I've run into a bug?! I've enabled debug and it seems like I didn't end an activity right. Female PC, straight, friend activity (eat) with Sunny in GS. I've left after a while, since nothing happened after I've exhausted all of the option multiple times. I assumed that the activity ends itself after a while, but it looks like Sunny thinks it is still ongoing. The console gives two different types of Abort messages if I try to do stuff with other NPCs. The scan debug says that they are "locked" because an activity is still ongoing. I removed the tokens from this mod from Sunny, which snapped her out of eat mode dialogue, but she is still eating and the console messages for the others haven't changed. Is there a way to end an activity manually (either through dialogue or console)? And if not, how can I end an activity (or know that an activity has ended) so this won't repeat itself? If I remember right, I think she needs to have a token removed and then removescriptpackage. I'm pretty sure it's the token that's keeping the package running on her. This won't happen in the new one as there are no locks anymore and all NPCs will continue to process through just about everything except dancing. ie. Group processing. Soon you will be able to start an activity and simply walk away if you choose, and everything should continue chugging along regardless. EDIT: Oh and I almost forgot. With the new one you can do activities with multiple NPCs at once. Already tested and working. Edited June 21, 2015 by t3589
BruceWayne Posted June 21, 2015 Posted June 21, 2015 I've actually narrowed it down to the script. But I don't know how to manipulate quest variables in object scripts with the console (or NX variables for that matter). Removing the tokens and the package snapped her out of the eating activity and her still eating, but it doesn't "resume" or resolve the overall situation. I've tested by running naked through Westside (which would guarantee lots of NPC interaction with high morality). NPCs were running up to my character, but turned around once they've reached her (whereas usually they whistle and have a "negative reaction" or something along those lines). If there is one thing I would suggest for the new beta, it would be to give the player an opportunity to end the activity themselves (to easily resolve this issue). In the beginning of the game you get a lot of diminishing return in terms of affection and relation anyway, and keeping the activity going after that is just cruel. Anyway, I reverted to an earlier save and I'm going to be more careful what activities I do from now on. I've read up on the thread a bit, and I'm sorry that I pester you with problems from the current version, since you've said you don't support it anymore. Somehow I always manage to pick the game up again, when you are about to release something new. I'm looking forward for a way for modders to implement this system. Though I'm a little sad that you've said that you plan to axe the ability to customize and control NPCs in-game.
t3589 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Posted June 21, 2015 If there is one thing I would suggest for the new beta, it would be to give the player an opportunity to end the activity themselves (to easily resolve this issue). In the beginning of the game you get a lot of diminishing return in terms of affection and relation anyway, and keeping the activity going after that is just cruel. Anyway, I reverted to an earlier save and I'm going to be more careful what activities I do from now on. I've read up on the thread a bit, and I'm sorry that I pester you with problems from the current version, since you've said you don't support it anymore. Somehow I always manage to pick the game up again, when you are about to release something new. I'm looking forward for a way for modders to implement this system. Though I'm a little sad that you've said that you plan to axe the ability to customize and control NPCs in-game. In the new one you don't have to end the activity. You can: - Walk away whenever you choose, the activity will end regardless. (Result: NPC will probably get mad). - Or use the dialog option to say goodbye whenever you like (Result: NPC might get mad depending if they start an argument over it or not.). - Or wait for them to say goodbye (A sure bet.). They will let go of any packages/anims/settings no matter what you choose to do. The beta works nothing like the alpha. It is in fact a completely new mod, written from the ground up. The modding capability is the reason I wanted to take out the customizations. I didn't want players posing NPCs that a modder has set a certain way. Which option do you think you'll miss? So far: - There are inclusion and exclusion options on almost every individual NPC. - There are now group inclusion options, territory by territory. ie. Add everyone in GoodSprings with one click. Likewise disable the towns you don't want included. This should make it friendlier with other mods. - Compatibility is no longer walled off. Which means incompatibles are just as likely to develop a deeper relationship (and become sexually curious) as compatibles. - Morality is no longer determined by a quest setting but is tracked on an individual basis and can change depending upon what they witness (they can be desensitized to your shenanigans over time). - Likewise with commitment limits. Let me know which one and I'll see what I can do.
BruceWayne Posted June 21, 2015 Posted June 21, 2015 I don't think that modding capabilities and the ability for the player to customize NPCs need to be exclusive. At least not from a design standpoint. In the end it is the player who should decide how they want to play. I was the exact same opinion once, that the mod author should always have the prerogative what happens with their story and NPCs. But after I've played my mod myself I found, that while I was playing, it was not what I hoped it would be. Having characters limited to one player build and, more important, play style was more frustrating than rewarding. Hence I came to the conclusion, that I never want to restrict the player again (if I were to resume or make a new mod) and offer as much customization and freedom as possible. That doesn't mean that I would cheapen my mod, as the player would have to consciously change the settings to deviate from what I wanted it to be. Another example are orientations. The character in SOA was meant to be straight. But very soon I got messages saying that people are disappointed that they can't play my mod because they played a female character or wanted to have a deeper "lesbian" experience. And I didn't lose anything by taking out that one check, that would have prevented them from playing the mod. It's kind of the same with the discussion regarding the married couple in Fallout 4. While I don't have a problem with that and I'm really looking forward to it, for some people this is an obstacle in their "head-canon". Though the arguments in the discussion are usually a little weak, I still get where they are coming from. The customization you already have looks good. Though I wouldn't take out the "Control Freak" option (love the ability to rename characters, btw). On the contrary, I would allow players to modify even more variables with it. As I've said above, this doesn't take away from the original intentions of mystery and randomized characters, if you don't want to. But it can get very frustrating if you really want your PC to have a relationship with NPC x, y or z and you have no idea why you can't make it happen. I hope you understand where I'm coming from. I really do enjoy the randomness, the sense of uncertainty, and pro-active NPCs (Crusader Kings II is one of my favortie games). However in some cases I do want to have some control and the ability to check why things don't work out. Also, in case of RNG gone mad or a NPC that I absolutely must have.
t3589 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Posted June 21, 2015 I don't think that modding capabilities and the ability for the player to customize NPCs need to be exclusive. At least not from a design standpoint. In the end it is the player who should decide how they want to play. I was the exact same opinion once, that the mod author should always have the prerogative what happens with their story and NPCs. But after I've played my mod myself I found, that while I was playing, it was not what I hoped it would be. Having characters limited to one player build and, more important, play style was more frustrating than rewarding. Hence I came to the conclusion, that I never want to restrict the player again (if I were to resume or make a new mod) and offer as much customization and freedom as possible. That doesn't mean that I would cheapen my mod, as the player would have to consciously change the settings to deviate from what I wanted it to be. Another example are orientations. The character in SOA was meant to be straight. But very soon I got messages saying that people are disappointed that they can't play my mod because they played a female character or wanted to have a deeper "lesbian" experience. And I didn't lose anything by taking out that one check, that would have prevented them from playing the mod. It's kind of the same with the discussion regarding the married couple in Fallout 4. While I don't have a problem with that and I'm really looking forward to it, for some people this is an obstacle in their "head-canon". Though the arguments in the discussion are usually a little weak, I still get where they are coming from. The customization you already have looks good. Though I wouldn't take out the "Control Freak" option (love the ability to rename characters, btw). On the contrary, I would allow players to modify even more variables with it. As I've said above, this doesn't take away from the original intentions of mystery and randomized characters, if you don't want to. But it can get very frustrating if you really want your PC to have a relationship with NPC x, y or z and you have no idea why you can't make it happen. I hope you understand where I'm coming from. I really do enjoy the randomness, the sense of uncertainty, and pro-active NPCs (Crusader Kings II is one of my favortie games). However in some cases I do want to have some control and the ability to check why things don't work out. Also, in case of RNG gone mad or a NPC that I absolutely must have. I do understand, and I almost always favor player choice. However there a few points that I struggle with in the context of this mod. In light of the following, what would you do? - I want modders to use this. I also feel like no one ever will, as long as I'm already doing the things that I want the modders to do. ie. Setting up customizations. As an incentive I thought, "If they want more customization, they can create and share their own NPC profiles (a template is coming that allows you all the customization options in Control Freak and then some).". - The core philosophy of this mod is to break the poser mold. To have players actually 'play' the relationship, with all the positives and negatives that comes along with dynamism. If I offer too much customization, it violates this philosophy. The thought of which makes me want to stop working on this mod altogether. Granted I agree there is a balance to be struck. - The primary focus of this mod is NOT sex. Again we're back to 'playing' the relationship like a game. Where sometimes you get what you want and other times you don't and you just have to deal with it. That being said, we both know why players use the Control Freak option. To the majority, those options are 'give me sex' buttons. I don't want to feel like I've given in to this (it's something I passionately hate), at least on my end. This mod was made for a certain kind of player and/or dialog modder. But that's pretty much how I feel about it currently. I'm sure I can be flexible on some things, but the core philosophy is the very reason I began this mod. When that's gone, I will likely loose all desire to continue with it. That's my dilemma when it comes to broad customization in game. Also of course I'm leaving in the renamer. Got to have that.
BruceWayne Posted June 21, 2015 Posted June 21, 2015 I completely understand that point of view and your philosophy. That's why I like this mod and the idea of this mod in the first place. I've played almost all of the prominent approach mods, and this is the only one that "gets it right", in my opinion. Not that the others are bad, but DRL offers so much possibility in terms of roleplaying and emergent gameplay. I wouldn't want to play the game without it anymore. I think the only thing we currently disagree on is what customization means in terms of this mod. I'm not suggesting a cheat terminal or anything like that, which would defeat the whole purpose. But imo, having the ability to customize the base premise of NPCs does not take away from the unique feel and purpose of the mod or transforms it into a instant gratification-poser. With base premise I mean things like: Orientation, attributes (the ones you gave them, like jealousy, etc), favorites, etc. Because let's assume I have a mod that adds NPC "Gary McMegagay" and DRL decides that he is a straight, cold-hearted, super-jealous rape machine (not sure if that's possible, let's assume). But that mod author wanted him to be a kind gay flowerchild who wouldn't harm anybody. This is easier to rectify with an in-game setup, as opposed to an extra plugin. It would also take nothing away from the mod itself, since we would only be able to change the starting parameters. In the end, it is your decision how you want to handle this. I only feel so strongly about this, because this is basically the mod I've always wanted (but couldn't pull off myself). I'll play it no matter what.
t3589 Posted June 21, 2015 Author Posted June 21, 2015 I completely understand that point of view and your philosophy. That's why I like this mod and the idea of this mod in the first place. I've played almost all of the prominent approach mods, and this is the only one that "gets it right", in my opinion. Not that the others are bad, but DRL offers so much possibility in terms of roleplaying and emergent gameplay. I wouldn't want to play the game without it anymore. I think the only thing we currently disagree on is what customization means in terms of this mod. I'm not suggesting a cheat terminal or anything like that, which would defeat the whole purpose. But imo, having the ability to customize the base premise of NPCs does not take away from the unique feel and purpose of the mod or transforms it into a instant gratification-poser. With base premise I mean things like: Orientation, attributes (the ones you gave them, like jealousy, etc), favorites, etc. Because let's assume I have a mod that adds NPC "Gary McMegagay" and DRL decides that he is a straight, cold-hearted, super-jealous rape machine (not sure if that's possible, let's assume). But that mod author wanted him to be a kind gay flowerchild who wouldn't harm anybody. This is easier to rectify with an in-game setup, as opposed to an extra plugin. It would also take nothing away from the mod itself, since we would only be able to change the starting parameters. In the end, it is your decision how you want to handle this. I only feel so strongly about this, because this is basically the mod I've always wanted (but couldn't pull off myself). I'll play it no matter what. I see your point and will probably put some things back in. But for example, orientation. Why would you play out the game trying to persuade an incompatible over to your side, when you can just change their orientation? Is a choice that will never get chosen really a choice? lol And if that's the case, why did I even bother putting in the mechanisms to make this possible? As far as Gary McMegagay (say that ten times fast), I don't even want to try to account for those types of inconsistencies. Mainly because this is a framework. This mod isn't trying to be the complete storyteller. Yes it has default dialog, and yes you can play it. But what it provides in playability is only evident in absence of a modder. ie. If the modder uses this mod, Gary will be exactly what he's supposed to be (including options to change Garys orientation in game). If the modder doesn't, then you get the default system. That's just my thinking currently, doesn't mean I won't add it. It's things like these that make it tough to decide.
ljacquard Posted June 21, 2015 Posted June 21, 2015 I would like to provide some input of mine, without hopefully interrupting the ongoing discussion.About modders *needing* to use this - personally, when I had the chance to play your "alpha", I was mostly happy with the "feedback" that I got from your mod. Most could consider it limited, because [Niner stares at your legs (or butt, can't remember right now)] is obviously less literate and developed than say While scanning your surroundings, you glance over your shoulder and notice that Niner studies your legs with delicious intent. Would this betray a new-found affection for you ? You hide a bemused smile as you wipe your forehead with your hand, the sun being particularly hot today. His faces flushes an embarassing beet-red as he probably becomes aware that you caught him on the fact. You both quickly focus your attention back to the hostile desert as it might have been conspiring at your impending doom while you were distracted. Better be ready for anything!". However, I can see a positive in this, insofar as that I, the player, can put words (or even actions) behind whatever plays on my screen, thanks to my imagination. As much as I enjoy to read (or participate in) stories that I haven't initiated (I wouldn't love RPGs otherwise), in the case of adult content I am often frustrated because authors would pick a wording, or rather a style, that rarely suits my fantasies and conception of what "slutty", "slave", "sexy", "orgasm", "cute", "etc." or even "feminine" means. I don't think myself as particularly prude, it's just that I don't enjoy the whole in-game sex business to roll out so quickly, crudely and *differently* in front of my eyes like it often does. To give you an example, there are people who greatly enjoy Bioware's sex cutscenes, but I don't. I can't. I prefer a black screen to them any day. On the other hand, it might seem ludicrous to some other players that I would go out of my way to mod in extra layers that affect the virtual sexlife of my in-game avatar, like everything that comes with <Sexout> and its many plugins (lust management, fertility cycles, gender attraction, ambush-rapes, etc.).I understand your goal, and I genuinely hope that your mod becomes as successful as you wish it to be, but in definitive, and as far as I am concerned, I think that your mod (version alpha, barring any glaring bugs) already manages to stand on its two feet on its own, and is viable and very enjoyable to any player like me. Please be proud of that (and/or don't be too hard on yourself).
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now