Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dosfox said:

Thank you both for your very informative and helpful replies.

 

I do have "absolutely huge settlements with tons of vendors" (3000-6000 building objects, 30-60 settlers, 20-30 vendor-type assignments, etc) but the only scripted NPC mods i use are SKK Combat Settlers (set for "cowardly"), MoreActiveAI (set for 100 NPCs), and Autonomy Enhanced. Since installing Buffout4 overall settlement performance has been great.

 

That number of objects might impact the game in other ways. But, it shouldn't impact it through AAF unless you somehow have animations configured for over half of every object in the entire settlement.

 

1 hour ago, dosfox said:

 

So i am beginning to wonder, is it possible that Autonomy relies on those deleted arrays in some way? @Invictusblade mentioned he wasn't sure what is in the original code for Autonomy, and some of the errors i am experiencing do appear like they may be caused by missing animation/position information, and did become more frequent after one particular AAF update.

 

I don't think so. I think that I had a function that included a list of all animations at one point. But, it was removed early on because then it would only allow 128 animations total. So, there would have been very limited opportunity for other authors to use that.

Link to comment

I did a search and it looks like this hasn't been asked in a while.

 

There is now a body mod for FO4VR

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/53464?tab=posts

 

Early stages, but I'm wondering if and when a VR version of your mod might be possible using FRIK. I'm sure that's a *lot* of work that you might not have time for right now but I'm looking forward to playing FO4VR once I'm done with SkyrimVR and I'd love to have AAF as a part of the load order.

 

Thanks for all the work you've done so far! I became a Patreon supporter but that's not meant to pressure you, I plan on using your mod soon even if it's in flat screen so no worries if your priorities lie elswyer.

Link to comment
17 hours ago, mangybastard said:

I did a search and it looks like this hasn't been asked in a while.

 

There is now a body mod for FO4VR

 

https://www.nexusmods.com/fallout4/mods/53464?tab=posts

 

Early stages, but I'm wondering if and when a VR version of your mod might be possible using FRIK. I'm sure that's a *lot* of work that you might not have time for right now but I'm looking forward to playing FO4VR once I'm done with SkyrimVR and I'd love to have AAF as a part of the load order.

 

Thanks for all the work you've done so far! I became a Patreon supporter but that's not meant to pressure you, I plan on using your mod soon even if it's in flat screen so no worries if your priorities lie elswyer.

 

Thank you. Interesting question. I haven't tried out Skyrim or Fallout VR yet.

 

AAF is already designed to run animations on whatever actors are sent to it. So, it shouldn't be too far off provided that this new body in the mod is able to be referenced like any other actor. I would probably need to make some adjustments so that it is recognized as the player body and not an NPC. But, shouldn't require too much work.

 

The bigger challenge is more just having everything set up to test it. I do have VR available. But, it's been collecting dust unused for a while...

Link to comment
10 hours ago, dagobaking said:

 

Thank you. Interesting question. I haven't tried out Skyrim or Fallout VR yet.

 

AAF is already designed to run animations on whatever actors are sent to it. So, it shouldn't be too far off provided that this new body in the mod is able to be referenced like any other actor. I would probably need to make some adjustments so that it is recognized as the player body and not an NPC. But, shouldn't require too much work.

 

The bigger challenge is more just having everything set up to test it. I do have VR available. But, it's been collecting dust unused for a while...

 

That's exciting news! I would be happy to gift you a copy of FO4VR if that would help as it's currently on sale for 14.99. Reading past posts it looks like @prinyo is also interested in this. I don't want to speak for someone I don't know but figured I'd call them out in case they are set up and willing to help test if needed. I also would be willing to do some testing, though my knowledge of modding is limited.

Link to comment

Several months ago I tried to get the AAF and some other mods DLLs recompiled against the VR script extender but only got non-answers that "it would probably not work anyway". This to make AAF work with FO4VR at all, not upgrading for specific VR compatibility.

Maybe  at some point I can try the new body with 4Play - it does have the alignment issues. but maybe with the body mod there will be workarounds.

 

Link to comment
4 hours ago, prinyo said:

Several months ago I tried to get the AAF and some other mods DLLs recompiled against the VR script extender but only got non-answers that "it would probably not work anyway". This to make AAF work with FO4VR at all, not upgrading for specific VR compatibility.

Maybe  at some point I can try the new body with 4Play - it does have the alignment issues. but maybe with the body mod there will be workarounds.

it does work with FO4VR just not the way you expect it to as AAF animates a clone of the players character for increased reliability, so you'll never be able to watch scenes from a 1st person perspective.

 

There'll be a few glitches too as LM for FO4VR is not always updated alongside the non-VR version.

Edited by CGi
Link to comment
3 hours ago, CGi said:

it does work with FO4VR just not the way you expect it to as AAF animates a clone of the players character for increased reliability, so you'll never be able to watch scenes from a 1st person perspective.

 

There'll be a few glitches too as LM for FO4VR is not always updated alongside the non-VR version.

TFC works well enough in SkyrimVR to insert yourself into a scene. Not always ideal and far from necessary for Skyrim but it's better than nothing if you really need that first-person perspective.

Link to comment
25 minutes ago, mangybastard said:

TFC works well enough in SkyrimVR to insert yourself into a scene. Not always ideal and far from necessary for Skyrim but it's better than nothing if you really need that first-person perspective.

Positioning the camera was always possible in non-VR.
Doing this in VR via automated means is just not possible (yet) due to missing functionality.

Link to comment
12 hours ago, prinyo said:

Several months ago I tried to get the AAF and some other mods DLLs recompiled against the VR script extender but only got non-answers that "it would probably not work anyway". This to make AAF work with FO4VR at all, not upgrading for specific VR compatibility.

Maybe  at some point I can try the new body with 4Play - it does have the alignment issues. but maybe with the body mod there will be workarounds.

 

 

I vaguely remember this. I think the issue is that AAF uses functions in LLFP which may not be available in FO4VR.

 

If that is the case, yeah, it wouldn't really work. For example, how would "free cam" work while in VR? Maybe it does...? I have never tried it to see what is possible.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, dagobaking said:

I vaguely remember this. I think the issue is that AAF uses functions in LLFP which may not be available in FO4VR.

The "issue" (that may exist) is not really relevant to the question/request, that is - let us have a DLL compiled for FO4VR and let people test and experiment. Every answer to this has been, similarly to this post, a deflection that I understand to mean unwillingness to deal with this. And I respect it so I have filed FO4VR in the category of "failed" projects (also the fact it runs like shit on even the best PC doesn't help). 

 

All the "problems" and "issues" are conceptually identical in SkyrimVR and they have been resolved in different ways in the past years depending on how advanced the framework has been. Technically the solutions can be different and a FO4VR sex system can be less advanced than the one for Skyrim VR , but that's OK and is not a reason to surrender before trying. 

However the DLL of LooksMenu has to also be recompiled and I can imagine the VR port can hide some unpleasant surprises, so as I said I respect the unwillingness to open this box of Pandora.

 

 

 

16 hours ago, mangybastard said:

TFC works well enough in SkyrimVR to insert yourself into a scene.

Don't do that, use the SL VR patch instead.

Edited by prinyo
Link to comment
2 hours ago, prinyo said:

The "issue" (that may exist) is not really relevant to the question/request, that is - let us have a DLL compiled for FO4VR and let people test and experiment.

The issue definitely does exist and the fix is not trivial.  Simply recompiling LLFP against F4SEVR won’t work because several functions in LLFP use offsets into the game executable that are not defined in F4SE.  Someone who owns FO4VR and has the equipment needed to run it would have to find the corresponding offsets in the VR executable.  

 

 

Edited by EgoBallistic
Link to comment
29 minutes ago, EgoBallistic said:

Someone who owns FO4VR and has the equipment needed to run it would have to find the corresponding offsets in the VR executable.  

So it is not an "issue", but just a thing that needs to be done. I can appreciate it is not trivial and is probably a tedious process, but is not a "problem" or a blocking issue. However I do understand that "it is too much work" is a valid reason to decline teh request.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, prinyo said:

So it is not an "issue", but just a thing that needs to be done. I can appreciate it is not trivial and is probably a tedious process, but is not a "problem" or a blocking issue. However I do understand that "it is too much work" is a valid reason to decline teh request.

 

It's a blocking issue unless there is someone sufficiently interested in dedicating the necessary time to solving it. Maybe that someone is you? The mod source code and compilers are all available, so it's "just" a matter of investing enough effort to (perhaps learn how to) make it happen.

Link to comment
8 hours ago, prinyo said:

Don't do that, use the SL VR patch instead.

I've only done that when I forgot to check the first person option on a fresh install of SL. I've used the patch since it came out. Thank you for being proactive though I appreciate it.

 

I wish I had learned more than cosmetic mods and animations, but that's all I have experience with. Beyond wading through tutorials all I can offer is monetary support for anyone (experienced) who spends some time on this. Tutorials might be what I end up doing once I'm done playing Skyrim.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, prinyo said:

Wow that fell earlier than expected ? 

If somebody has constructive remarks I'll be happy to reply.

 

Okay, I'll bite. Yesterday you said:

 

Quote

I tried to get the AAF and some other mods DLLs recompiled against the VR script extender but only got non-answers that "it would probably not work anyway". This to make AAF work with FO4VR at all, not upgrading for specific VR compatibility.

 

And then later:

 

Quote

let us have a DLL compiled for FO4VR and let people test and experiment. Every answer to this has been, similarly to this post, a deflection that I understand to mean unwillingness to deal with this.

 

Have you tried to compile these yourself? If so, how did you go about it, and what compiler errors did you get? Do you know which functions are missing, what needs reimplementing, and so on?

 

My previous post was a genuine suggestion, if you have a strong interest in seeing this supported then your options are to lead the way and make it happen yourself, or sit back and wait for someone to (quite possibly never) hand it to you on a silver platter. They are both reasonable routes to take, but please remember that nobody is obligated to do any of it for you.

Link to comment

 

9 hours ago, prinyo said:

The "issue" (that may exist) is not really relevant to the question/request, that is - let us have a DLL compiled for FO4VR and let people test and experiment. Every answer to this has been, similarly to this post, a deflection that I understand to mean unwillingness to deal with this. And I respect it so I have filed FO4VR in the category of "failed" projects (also the fact it runs like shit on even the best PC doesn't help). 

 

All the "problems" and "issues" are conceptually identical in SkyrimVR and they have been resolved in different ways in the past years depending on how advanced the framework has been. Technically the solutions can be different and a FO4VR sex system can be less advanced than the one for Skyrim VR , but that's OK and is not a reason to surrender before trying. 

However the DLL of LooksMenu has to also be recompiled and I can imagine the VR port can hide some unpleasant surprises, so as I said I respect the unwillingness to open this box of Pandora.

 

Perhaps there is some kind of misunderstanding here?

 

I don't have any DLL to give you. AAF does use functions from a DLL that was made by another mod author. I have no control over that mod/DLL.

 

2 hours ago, prinyo said:

Wow that fell earlier than expected ? 

If somebody has constructive remarks I'll be happy to reply. 

 

Maybe you are unaware of this. But, your tone in making this "request" seems pretty aggressive.

 

I have no obligation to "deal with this", therefore my answer is not a deflection of anything. I'm explaining to you that my mod doesn't involve the areas where most of the big work would be needed to get what you want. And I don't have some kind of authority where I can or would demand that those authors do this work.

 

If you think that FO4VR is a failed project you should probably take that up with its authors. But, telling them that, imo, is unlikely to be very persuasive.

 

Could an entirely new animation framework be made for FO4VR without any further DLL work? Maybe. I'd have to spend quite a lot of time looking more closely at it just to even answer that question. Others who have already coded for FO4VR may already know its limitations, etc.

 

I don't like to ever say never. But, I'm unlikely to take on that project because I already have my hands full. I'm more likely to become interested in adding a framework for a new Bethesda game before I would make a new framework for FO4VR.

 

There is no reason why someone who is enthusiastic about FO4VR can't take the bull by the horns and start on such a project themselves. And that is not an insult or deflection. That is how all mods start.

Link to comment
11 hours ago, dagobaking said:

Maybe you are unaware of this. But, your tone in making this "request" seems pretty aggressive.

I am in fact unaware. And I was very careful to not be aggressive so not to provoke the hostility that I got regardless. Can you quote the parts from my posts that you think are aggressive? In fact I was everything but:

 

Quote

a deflection that I understand to mean unwillingness to deal with this. And I respect it

Quote

However I do understand that "it is too much work" is a valid reason to decline the request.

 

My whole point was to say that I understand that it can be complicated and too much work for what is in essence a hobby. You can't be less "aggressively requesting" than this. But the reactions I got speak themselves and are a good answer to the question in the post that I was tagged in and that brought me here.

 

Edited by prinyo
Link to comment
13 hours ago, vaultbait said:

[./..]

After been active for several years in the Skyrim/SkyrimVR modding and community I have learned that for all but a very few people the DLLs in mods are black boxes. If a mod has a DLL that is incompatible then that's the end of the road unless some nice soul takes pity and recompiles. If there is a working DLL and there are other problems people start to experiment, make script changes and things start to move forward. Not having a compatible DLL file is a hard blocking factor.

I personally have learned to use CK, Nifskope and other mesh editing software, learned Papyrus as much as I needed, spent hundreds of hours of debugging and experimenting of porting the pancake Skyrim mods to VR and I have set my boundary to DLLs and skeleton nodes and IK.

When I said "I tried to get" the DLLs recompiled I mean I did the things that did work for SkyrimVR and that resulted in practically all flat mod DLLs been recompiled: I contacted the mod authors with a very polite request. I searched for the source code with the idea to find somebody else to recompile (coudn't find it). I wanted to check the source code also in order to get an idea if it is possible to avoid using the DLL at all (the way SL Light did some time ago).

 

In the mean time I made a patch for 4Play that spawns a clone for the scenes involving  the PC. However I realized that the 4Play is not the way to go and decided against working on a VR patch for it. Instead I was hoping somebody will recompile the DLL used by AAF and unlock the further progress.

 

 

Link to comment
6 hours ago, prinyo said:

I searched for the source code with the idea to find somebody else to recompile (coudn't find it). I wanted to check the source code also in order to get an idea if it is possible to avoid using the DLL at all (the way SL Light did some time ago).

 

In the mean time I made a patch for 4Play that spawns a clone for the scenes involving  the PC. However I realized that the 4Play is not the way to go and decided against working on a VR patch for it. Instead I was hoping somebody will recompile the DLL used by AAF and unlock the further progress.

 

The DLL in question is this one, and its archive includes the source code for it as well:

 

Link to comment
13 hours ago, prinyo said:

I am in fact unaware. And I was very careful to not be aggressive so not to provoke the hostility that I got regardless. Can you quote the parts from my posts that you think are aggressive? In fact I was everything but:

 

 

My whole point was to say that I understand that it can be complicated and too much work for what is in essence a hobby. You can't be less "aggressively requesting" than this. But the reactions I got speak themselves and are a good answer to the question in the post that I was tagged in and that brought me here.

 

I don't want to involve myself but I think it might be worth suggesting you read the past few pages of this thread. I did while trying to look for VR discussions and Dagobaking has been responding to a lot of hostility lately. Just wanting to point that out in hopes that understanding what he's been dealing with softens some blows.

Link to comment
14 hours ago, prinyo said:

I am in fact unaware. And I was very careful to not be aggressive so not to provoke the hostility that I got regardless. Can you quote the parts from my posts that you think are aggressive? In fact I was everything but:

 

My whole point was to say that I understand that it can be complicated and too much work for what is in essence a hobby. You can't be less "aggressively requesting" than this. But the reactions I got speak themselves and are a good answer to the question in the post that I was tagged in and that brought me here.

 

 

This whole paragraph comes off as aggressive:

 

On 8/17/2021 at 4:47 AM, prinyo said:

The "issue" (that may exist) is not really relevant to the question/request, that is - let us have a DLL compiled for FO4VR and let people test and experiment. Every answer to this has been, similarly to this post, a deflection that I understand to mean unwillingness to deal with this. And I respect it so I have filed FO4VR in the category of "failed" projects (also the fact it runs like shit on even the best PC doesn't help). 

 

This is not to be argumentative. But, to simply answer your question about what appears aggressive:

 

A) In the first sentence you make a semantic assumption about what was meant by an "issue" and claim that it is irrelevant anyway. That is discourteous toward someone who was simply trying to answer a question in good faith.

 

B) In the next half of that sentence you imply that I have something that I am withholding (a DLL).

 

C) While you say that you respect an "unwillingness to deal with this" you are still making the clear accusation that it is a "deflection" and is in fact an "unwillingness to deal with this" which is by no means established anywhere.

 

D) The negativity of this paragraph is only reinforced with a cherry on top in the last sentence when you declare that FO4VR is a failed project and runs like shit. As if that has anything to do with myself. And even if it did, do you seriously think that the authors or many users that happily use FO4VR without needing an animation framework will just agree with that sitting down?

Link to comment
19 hours ago, vaultbait said:

 

The DLL in question is this one, and its archive includes the source code for it as well:

 

 

Thanks for this, Maybe it will be possible to use AAF without DLL, even in some limited form.

Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...