Devious Devices Framework Development/Beta

[_SpaceHamster_]

32 minutes ago, donkeywho said:

As a user, I'd prefer the balance to be towards the aggressive form

 

After all, almost all the mods on the site are about lust and depravity, so while kissy wissy has it's place, pump a rump seems to be more popular..... ?

 

 

I'll probably do something that looks consensual because I don't have much of an idea how to do aggressive animations

And also when animating, I'm mostly imaging how it'll be ingame, and while I like aggressive animations, I just prefer consensual over aggressive  

[Code Serpent]

I've discovered if you give a device to an NPC via the gift menu, like with Immersive Speechcraft, then it won't be equipped. I don't think this is intentional, as all that needs to be changed is changing line 339 of zadEquipScript to:

if UI.IsMenuOpen("ContainerMenu") || UI.IsMenuOpen("GiftMenu")

 

[Guest]

@Kimy

 

For my mod, I think I want ZaZ 7.0 animations now, but I understand these are going to be brought into DD and don't want to end up with both as requirements.

 

Is there something I can do now to make my life easier when DD upgrades and I have to remove the ZaZ dependency? I am new and don't know what I'm doing, so I will probably use a bad design pattern that makes it hard to update my mod...

[Kimy]

Not sure which ZAP animations you mean? The bound sex animations have been merged into DD since version 4.0.

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Kimy said:

Not sure which ZAP animations you mean? The bound sex animations have been merged into DD since version 4.0.

 

I mean the furniture idles, somehow I heard that they might be included eventually but maybe that's wrong.

[Kimy]

1 hour ago, Bobbert6996 said:

 

I mean the furniture idles, somehow I heard that they might be included eventually but maybe that's wrong.

No, that's correct. We're going to merge ZAP 7 devices and related animations into DD.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Kimy said:

No, that's correct. We're going to merge ZAP 7 devices and related animations into DD.

So is it "safe" to use ZAP as a master now, or would editing a mod after the DD update be enough work that it's better to wait for them to be merged with DD?

[Kimy]

ZAP 7 will remain available for download, so mods using it now don't -have- to update. If they chose to update, they will need to replace ZAP assets with the corresponding DD ones. We will need to rename assets and filepaths etc, so just changing masters will NOT to be enough. However, a lot of that work can be done automatically, using TES5Edit scripts. Keep in mind that we're NOT merging any ZAP 8 assets, so if you use any assets from this pack, you won't be able to drop ZAP 8 as a master later on.

 

My personal stance would be not to set a fresh dependency on ZAP 7 now, if you plan to use the DD furniture component in the future anyway.

[neosuduno]

Just wondering, but could we get a list of all the changes so far that will be in the next version? Got lost trying to piece it all together.

[LazyBoot]

19 hours ago, neosuduno said:

Just wondering, but could we get a list of all the changes so far that will be in the next version? Got lost trying to piece it all together.

You can see most public changes on github.

[neosuduno]

2 hours ago, LazyBoot said:

You can see most public changes on github.

I have no idea how to check what has changed/been fixed. Heck, I don't even know how which github to go to.

[LazyBoot]

16 hours ago, neosuduno said:

I have no idea how to check what has changed/been fixed. Heck, I don't even know how which github to go to.

Here's the links for DDi and DDx

https://github.com/DeviousDevices/DDi/commits/development

https://github.com/DeviousDevices/DDx/commits/development

 

Though you'll have to use the dates to figure out what's 4.1 and what is for the next version.

[Nazzzgul666]

On 8/24/2018 at 9:17 PM, _SpaceHamster_ said:

Something I haven't thought about it, any ideas what the "intention" of the animations are.
Might be worded badly, but does the DD team / DD users prefer aggressive animations? Consensual?

 

As a user i'd too say mainly aggressive, maybe as a compromise consensual where both all partners like it rough.

What i could imagine well for most items is doggy - that doesn't neccessarily need any coop on the receiving end, so it doesn't matter that much if it's rape or if they like it rough.

 

Another option that would be harder but might work for both is some kind of give in/up, with cooperation but some hesitating. Could work as consensual for shy girls.

 

For @Bobbert6996 question: did i get it right that ZAP will be included in a new DD package instead of DDi? So it's entirely his choice if/when he upgrades DDi but keeps ZAP or switches? I assume ZAP and your merged version would conflict, but maybe even that is wrong.

[El_Duderino]

1 hour ago, Nazzzgul666 said:

For @Bobbert6996 question: did i get it right that ZAP will be included in a new DD package instead of DDi? So it's entirely his choice if/when he upgrades DDi but keeps ZAP or switches? I assume ZAP and your merged version would conflict, but maybe even that is wrong.

I'm not sure I'm fully up to date with the latest developments of this new project, but as far as I know, this is what's planned:

• DD will release a new furniture bondage module. Coding for it is already well progressed and it will be a new seperate module, not become a part of DDi.
  • though the new mod will be aware of DDi of course (worn devices etc.)
• Content from ZAP 7 will get merged into the new furniture bondage mod, but this being an all new mod, I don't think there will be any conflicts with existing ZAP (whichever version), ignoring other possibly limiting factors like animation count.

[Guest]

15 hours ago, El_Duderino said:

I'm not sure I'm fully up to date with the latest developments of this new project, but as far as I know, this is what's planned:

• DD will release a new furniture bondage module. Coding for it is already well progressed and it will be a new seperate module, not become a part of DDi.
  • though the new mod will be aware of DDi of course (worn devices etc.)
• Content from ZAP 7 will get merged into the new furniture bondage mod, but this being an all new mod, I don't think there will be any conflicts with existing ZAP (whichever version), ignoring other possibly limiting factors like animation count.

 

Yes main thing is I prefer to use the DD mod when it's available rather than ZAP, so I will wait for that one

[Musje]

I can't get the new animations to play. All I ever get when starting a scene with a yoke or armbinder is the old DDZapArmBLesbian01 animation, the new ones aren't selected.

I installed the development versions downloaded from GitHub today, overwrote the previous development versions, and ran FNIS.

 

Also I can see the new SH animations in \Data\Meshes\actors\character\animations\DDSL and in the FNIS text file in that directory.

 

[Guest]

Hey, I was just checking in and saw all these post about DDi's sex filter.  I know the next version of sexlab isn't out yet, but anything I can do to help?

 

(Also, any news about an ETA on the new version of sexlab?)

[Guest]

So I have been reading and see that WW3 started and then was narrowly averted.  Seems it was an eventful August.

 

My plan is still the same:  wait for the new version of sexlab and help intergrate the new sex system.  Then I will look at things and see where they stand.

 

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

 

I just wanted to mention two issues that kill my desire to mod.  Not trying to start a fight.  Just read Kimy's "Seriously, next time just TALK to me, ok?" comment, which is probably why I decided to write this.

 

Again, not deciding anything right now and there is no emergency.  Not starting a fight.  Just giving my perspective and something to think about.

 

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

ISSUE #1

 

It used to be, if an idea was popular with DDi users/modders (a large portion of DDi use it) and compatible with DDi framework (could be included without breaking anything), it would automatically get added (usually with the option to disable it for those who didn't like it).  Armbinder combat was an example of this.  When I propossed the concept on the DDi thread, it was deemed in impossible, and so I made my own mod.  The idea turned out to be popular and compatible DDI, so it ended up being added.

 

Things are different now.  Popularity and compatibility are of secondary importance.  The key factor in what goes into DDi is approval of Kimy and her team.  One veto from a member of the team and an idea has zero chance of being included in DDi, no matter how popular or compatible.  I had a painful experience with this reality. 
 

While was still in the main development thread working on the new sex system last December, I had the idea in to make a "flexible" version the armbinder (arms/hands could bend during struggling animations, etc).  It would have allowed me lot more flexibility when converting new sex animations for DDi's use, allowing me to convert far more animations.  However, one member of Kimy's team had an objection, that this wouldn't be compatible with the DDi combat system. 

 

However, I knew this was untrue.  As the person originally set up the combat system, I knew the armbinder could be made flexible for those who wanted it, without any impacting DDi (it could be enabled/disabled through MCI menu for example).  Unfortunately, like what happened when I proposed bound combat, after the initial objection the idea was deemed dead and no one was willing to discuss it anymore.

 

Not realizing the way things had changed.  I did the same thing I did with bound combat:  I put aside the work I was doing and spent three weeks working on the idea, creating the flexible armbinder mod.  I did all this work convinced there was a 100% chance of it being added to DDI:  I was certain the idea would be popular and I knew it was compatible with DDi.  The reality was and is there is 0% chance of it being added to DDI, due to the veto from Kimy's team (the later disagreement over the player customization issue didn't help).

 

If I had realized how things now worked now, I could have avoided a lot of wasted effort...  10 month after I created bound combat, the idea was already intergrated into DDi and being expanded upon.  10 month after I created flexible arbinder, the idea is dead.

 

ArmBinder_Combat 0.14   ( Downloads 3,669 )   Submitted December 21, 2015

FLEXIBLE ARMBINDER 1.0.0    ( Downloads 1,912 )    Submitted December 17, 2017

 

Spoiler

 

Why this hurts my desire to mod:

 

Trying to propose and develope content for DDI has become a very unappealing prospect.  Instead of popularity or compatibility, I have to worry about appealing to personal preferences of every member of Kimy's team.  Even if I do manage to get approval for an idea, I still run the risk of pouring weeks of work into a project only for it to be vetoed at a later date (if I later offend a member of Kimy's team for example).

 

I don't want to develop content cattering to other peoples tastes (Kimy and her team) or play politics.  I want to develop content for MY tastes, with the knowledge that (if it is popular enough with no compatibility issues) it will be added to DDI (with the option to disable it for all those who don't want it).  I am really tired of DDi politics.

 

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

 

ISSUE #2

 

2)  In my Skyrim folder, I have about 450 saves taking up about 7GB of space.  Maybe half of these saves were made playing DDi mods, so that I could go back and enjoy them again.  I appreaciated all the DD mods I played over the years.  As a modder, I know how much effort went into making those mods, and I am upset when I see this work being disrespected.

 

I am most upset by what happened to Devious Cynthia.  Devious Cynthia was broken because Kimy's team added a gag that prevented speech to DDI, with no MCI option to disable this new behavior.  All the months of work that when into Devious Cynthia destroyed by what is, for all purposes, a whim.   This sends a message to every DD modder:  at any point, we can break your mod, and if you aren't around to update it, all of your work will have been for nothing. 

 

If DDi wants to encourage modders to create future content, then it must respect their past work, to the best of its ability.  There are unavoidable reasons for a framework update breaking mods (like big framework changes like the new DD item system), but personal preferrences on how DDI should work (no player customization, speachless gag, etc), are not an acceptable reason, at least to me.

 

 

 

[El_Duderino]

6 hours ago, cedec0 said:

personal preferrences on how DDI should work (no player customization, speachless gag, etc), are not an acceptable reason, at least to me

This is probably a bit splitting hairs now, but throwing personal preferences into the mix is unavoidable in small-group team efforts like DD. Whatever is being created or changed is necessarily based on the personal tastes and ideas of those individuals involved.

 

That being said ( = that hair having been sufficiently split), it's not like we guys in the DD team are entirely deaf to feedback. Customization is much improved in DD 4.1 after a lot of user feedback about it not working too well in DD 4.0. Now there are three difficulty sliders and a "consume keys" check box, on top of all the customization things that were kept from earlier versions.

 

And if you look at the Github commit log of DDi 4.2, you'll find numerous other changes and tweaks:

https://github.com/DeviousDevices/DDi/commits/development/00 Core

 

I won't comment on the flexible armbinder thing because I don't understand it well enough (the technical aspects of it) to form an opinion.

[Kimy]

13 hours ago, cedec0 said:

Hey, I was just checking in and saw all these post about DDi's sex filter.  I know the next version of sexlab isn't out yet, but anything I can do to help?

 

(Also, any news about an ETA on the new version of sexlab?)

You keep asking me that question and for some reason you seem to think that if you're just asking it often enough, my answer will be different one day. It won't. I said from the get-go, I won't include features in DD that rely on BETA versions of one of its dependencies. A quick check should have told you that SexLab 1.63 is -still- in beta. And not only that, but said beta isn't even available for LE/Oldrim. I know how ignorant you are, but still...really?

 

About your other post - I dunno what to add at this point that I haven't told you already. I stopped taking you for serious a long while ago, because while your postings habitually reach novel-length, it's just the same old nonconstructive bashings they always were (using gems like "Popularity and compatibility are of secondary importance"). You're pissed about some decisions we made you happen to disagree with, and for some reason I cannot even begin to grasp why you think you're entitled to demand other modders doing what YOU want. How dare the DD team decide what can and cannot go into DD, anyway! Imagine the verve! Mod authors actually making decisions for their mods! Shocking!

 

Instead you write gems like this:

 

"I don't want to develop content cattering to other peoples tastes (Kimy and her team) or play politics.  I want to develop content for MY tastes, with the knowledge that (if it is popular enough with no compatibility issues) it will be added to DDI (with the option to disable it for all those who don't want it).  I am really tired of DDi politics."

 

Seriously?

 

I got a reality check for you: You don't own DD. The DD team does. You can create all the original content you want and design it 100% around your taste. Just make an original mod of your own (which doesn't infringe other people's rights - stealing DD doesn't count!) and publish it. That's what modding is all about. What you, however, can NOT do is demanding OTHER mods to incorporate YOUR stuff or be designed around YOUR personal wishes. Why you think you have a god-given right to demand the world revolving around you is something I cannot really understand, because I lack your extreme levels of self-righteousness and entitlement.

 

Oh, and thanks for bashing me about Devious Cidna and suggesting that we didn't care about breaking it. Did it ever occur to you that this was an unintended side-effect? At all? And that we certainly would have found a way to fix it on our end, if DC's author hadn't beat us to it by just changing a few things in their mod to make it compatible with the new feature? I guess not. We break DD content mods for fun and giggles with every single update! Right? Right! This must be why there is exactly ONE DD update ever released in the "Kimy era" that actually was marked as not 100% backwards-compatible. Which was the one we gave a new major version number (4.0) to signal that exact circumstance to modders. Next thing you're probably going to tell me is that NO other software framework in history of computing has EVER made developers update content relying on it. Right? Because it would fit you.

 

I am tired of you, Cedec, and I will have no more of your rubbish. Take your hostile bash postings and stuff them in a really dark place. I won't read them anymore, because you will go on my ignore list now. I should have done that a year ago, really.

[Guest]

Quote

I got a reality check for you: You don't own DD.

I know that.

Quote

 What you, however, can NOT do is demanding OTHER mods to incorporate YOUR stuff or be designed around YOUR personal wishes.

I am not demanding anything.  On that note, I have an apology to make.  As I was working on the flexible armbinder, I said some things that must have come off as increadibly arrogant and insensitive, based on a misunderstanding on how things now work.

 

It had to with my experienced with developing bound combat.  I never spent any time asking the DDi team to include bound combat in the framework.  I just created the mod then came back 4-5 months later and found the DDi team busy intergrating bound combat into the framework (and helped them out at that point).  From that experience, I got the idea that if I created popular content, it would eventually get automatically added DDi.

 

DDi used to added ALL popular ideas, even the not great ones.  If an idea reached a certain threshhold of polularity, it was added, even if a majority of DDi user didn't particularly like that feature. This model worked because all these new features could be disabled, not impacting those who hated them.  For example, I never objected to lock jam or key break being added to DDi because I knew I would never, ever have to use them:  I could keep these features permanently disabled.  Similarly, If someone had proposed adding lock jam to DDi without an option to disable it, I am not sure it would have made it into the framework.  An MCI menu allowed ideas catering to all kinds of minorities to be included, while avoiding fights with the majorities that didn't necessarily like those ideas.

 

(One reason you have had a hell of a year is that, when you removed all player customization, all the fights that had been avoided over the years all happened at once.)

 

The point of all this is that DDI used to be somewhere where everyone stuffed their own ideas in, good or bad, with an MCI menu to keep everyone happy.  That model seems gone.

 

Quote

Oh, and thanks for bashing me about Devious Cidna and suggesting that we didn't care about breaking it. Did it ever occur to you that this was an unintended side-effect? At all? And that we certainly would have found a way to fix it on our end, if DC's author hadn't beat us to it by just changing a few things in their mod to make it compatible with the new feature? I guess not.

I know you didn't intentionally break devious Cidna (and I am happy to hear the issue has been solved).

 

[tryguy]

So, has there been any discussion of disallowing the player from searching chests/bodies when they're fully bound up? Like, with an armbinder and ball gag, it's pretty much impossible for anyone to open a drawer or search through a dead guy's things like that. All you can do is run and find someone to take something off, or I guess struggle and try to get the armbinder off that way. Then, I guess you'd have a chance of searching bodies and such.

[El_Duderino]

1 hour ago, tryguy said:

So, has there been any discussion of disallowing the player from searching chests/bodies when they're fully bound up? Like, with an armbinder and ball gag, it's pretty much impossible for anyone to open a drawer or search through a dead guy's things like that. All you can do is run and find someone to take something off, or I guess struggle and try to get the armbinder off that way. Then, I guess you'd have a chance of searching bodies and such.

But you still have you feet, don't you? Those pointy ballet boots make for some pretty decent tools to open things with. ?

 

All kidding aside, as far as I can remember, this has been discussed and it was decided that it would be too much of a potential show-stopper. Other mods rely on you being able to find keys even when in reality those restraints would completely immobilize you. DD heavily impacts the game's mechanics, but this might take it a step too far. Maybe a good comparison would be the blindfold effect. A real blindfold won't allow you to see anything, but implementing that would be a really bad idea in Skyrim where you don't have a sense of smell and touch to assist you. I think it is a similar situation with the bound hands' effects on gameplay.

 

PS: There is, I think, a feature in inte's Devious Devices Equip mod that allows you to disallow the "Activate" function in the game when wearing an armbinder. I don't know if this function still works with DD 4+, but this may be what you're looking for.

[SleepyJim]

4 hours ago, El_Duderino said:

...the blindfold effect...

Seeing a mention of blindfolds I'm going to take the opportunity to remake a request I think I probably made a long time ago. Is there any chance of having an option included to disable the effect entirely for standard blindfolds? Or is there a console command that can be used to reduce the Leeches Mode down to 0 instead of the 20 the current MCM allows?

 

I understand that to some it won't make sense, and would seem to make blindfolds irrelevant, but being able to see my character bound and helpless is one of the main joys in using devious mods. Just because my character gets blindfolded doesn't mean I should be as well. Personally, when I play submissive characters I don't do it because I want to be them, or want to be in a submissive role myself. I approach it more like playing as the dominant controlling them.

 

At the moment I usually cheat myself a key and get rid of them as soon as my character gets locked in one, and just use ones from non-devious devices or ZAP instead.

 

Thanks for considering it, and fair enough if you'd rather not. I thought it wouldn't hurt to ask in case the stance on this might have changed.

[Kimy]

So you want the MCM slider to go all the way down to zero in Leeches mode?

 

I can do that!