Jump to content

Flora Respawn VMAD


DayDreamer
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's quite remarkable, actually. The engine definitely does not expect the field to be there, but it at least does not crash horribly.

I think it is otherwise - the egnine definitely does expect VMAD to be there since it works, and even CK supports it. But why you can't attach scripts in CK?

The reason might be pretty simple. I remember there was a talk in SKSE thread on official forum why so many functions are absent in the base game. The general idea of discussion was that Bethesda added only functionality they needed to create the game, nothing more, nothing less. If they didn't need some event/function, why spending time and resources on implementing it at all?

The same can be what happened with scripts on trees - noone in dev team requested it for the content they were creating, and they just forgot/ignored scripts editor in CK tree window. Might as well be an easy fix for Creation Kit Extender.

Now I wonder about viability of scripts on other objects like explosions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is otherwise - the egnine definitely does expect VMAD to be there since it works, and even CK supports it. But why you can't attach scripts in CK?

The reason might be pretty simple. I remember there was a talk in SKSE thread on official forum why so many functions are absent in the base game. The general idea of discussion was that Bethesda added only functionality they needed to create the game, nothing more, nothing less. If they didn't need some event/function, why spending time and resources on implementing it at all?

The same can be what happened with scripts on trees - noone in dev team requested it for the content they were creating, and they just forgot/ignored scripts editor in CK tree window. Might as well be an easy fix for Creation Kit Extender.

Now I wonder about viability of scripts on other objects like explosions.

 

I agree that you are probably right. But, I hesitate to risk the save games of everyone who uses USKP to test that theory, is all. And I still think it's pretty remarkable it works, but SKSE folks and yourself will certainly know more about how Skyrim.exe parses plugin files than I do, so maybe it isn't such a big deal after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that you are probably right. But, I hesitate to risk the save games of everyone who uses USKP to test that theory, is all. And I still think it's pretty remarkable it works, but SKSE folks and yourself will certainly know more about how Skyrim.exe parses plugin files than I do, so maybe it isn't such a big deal after all.

I agree, only SKSE devs can tell for sure what is happening in the game at runtime, and if scripts on TREEs are normal (if they are willing to check it after all).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's quite remarkable, actually. The engine definitely does not expect the field to be there, but it at least does not crash horribly. So that either means everything is fine, or it introduces some subtle glitch where all hell breaks lose after 50 hours of gameplay. I have no idea.

 

it will secretly fix the lip sync bug :grinning:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a rough check in Tes5EDIT with the files provided here, and I still cannot see the scripts on TREE, as they are IDMs.

I'll start a new game and give it a run or something, but it seems like everything is fine according to the reports.

This means we still need compatible patches or every plugins that created new harvestables, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did a rough check in Tes5EDIT with the files provided here, and I still cannot see the scripts on TREE, as they are IDMs.

I'll start a new game and give it a run or something, but it seems like everything is fine according to the reports.

This means we still need compatible patches or every plugins that created new harvestables, yes?

 

Plugins that create new harvestable base objects will require a patch. Plugins that just place vanilla TREE and FLOR objects in the game will not need any patch.

 

I have released 2.0 as beta on Skyrim Nexus. Please have a look. Nothing special is required to upgrade from 1.x, although you shouldn't plan on downgrading back to 1.x later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edit: DayDreamer you're free to release your own plugin based on my work, but I think you probably jumped the gun. Like I said if this is viable I'm putting it in a 2.0 of my mod anyway. And in case you didn't already I will do the work to make sure people can upgrade from the 1.x stuff seamlessly.

Am just seeing this now. I released before this message, after checking the permissions on yours, and doing the appropriately cited acknowledgements. Had no idea you had the time or inclination to make a 2.0, especially as you'd said your tests didn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over on the Bethesda USKP forum, Arthmoor is opining that this uses too many long-lived process stack entries. We can reduce that by aggregating all the harvesting into a per-visit per-cell array. Any interest in that alternative design?

 

I'm of the opinion that Bluedanieru's previous design has already demonstrated that stack isn't an issue. This would solely be a sop to Arthmoor's conservative tendencies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over on the Bethesda USKP forum, Arthmoor is opining that this uses too many long-lived process stack entries. We can reduce that by aggregating all the harvesting into a per-visit per-cell array. Any interest in that alternative design?

 

I'm of the opinion that Bluedanieru's previous design has already demonstrated that stack isn't an issue. This would solely be a sop to Arthmoor's conservative tendencies.

 

Since I like your idea (have tested it and i works for me), I'd also be interested in convincing Arthmoor somehow. Thus, I did already post an alternative strategy over at the Beth forums (yes, I violated your script - sorry).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am just seeing this now. I released before this message, after checking the permissions on yours, and doing the appropriately cited acknowledgements. Had no idea you had the time or inclination to make a 2.0, especially as you'd said your tests didn't work.

I made the perms what they are because I have no problem with people using resources from my mods for their own stuff. No worries there.

Your choice of title for your mod is a bit problematic for me, though. Usually 'redux' is used for old, obsolete or otherwise deprecated mods which are no longer maintained by their author. That's not the case here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Arthmoor, this fix is not something that can be freely thrown at public. We don't know the true reason of nonscripted trees, so unless a Bethesda dev confirms that they just forgot to add them in CK, or someone from SKSE checks internal runtime code for possible issues, better to keep this separate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some thoughts:

 

In vanilla Skyrim, only the player is harvesting ingredients. While you can make packages to let NPCs go collecting, there's no such package running on any NPC in the vanilla game. Some follower mods include this feature, allowing you to send them collecting ingredients for you - but to support this is not within the scope of the USKP. Thus, one can actually concentrate on the player.

 

Items added to the player's inventory are permanently monitored: this triggers OnItemAdded events for evaluation by the story manager. If a node is added that reacts on ingredients added to the player's inventory and starts a quest with a small script to evaluate the OnItemAdded event, there would be access to the reference of the plant without the need of adding a script to it:

 

(1) OnItemAdded returns a source container. I have no idea whether this is the plant's reference, but it's well worth trying it.

(2) If (1) doesn't work, the reference of the harvested plant can be retrieved by running one of the game script's FindClosestRef... functions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to retain the ability for more than the player to harvest. Although for some (all?) critters there is a script restriction that checks for player harvesting.

 

This means that we'll have to ask the SKSE team for help to (hopefully) dispel any doubts (and if it was only to calm Zilav: he seems to infer that he gave you Pandora's box and he's apparently regretting it ...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might need to keep in mind that I've seen Serana bending down like she was harvesting a plant. I don't know if it's actually doing anything useful but still.

hGncEh8.jpg

 

This means that we'll have to ask the SKSE team for help to (hopefully) dispel any doubts (and if it was only to calm Zilav: he seems to infer that he gave you Pandora's box and he's apparently regretting it ...)

I don't regret anything that can expand possibilities of this game, but unofficial patches should remain as conservative as they can be. Reputation loss can be too much.

But don't see any problem keeping this as a separate patch with a warning in description that it has "unusual" content.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eventually, I'd like this to go into USKP. We have to have complete confidence in it. I think we've done enough short-term testing to be sure the CK works with it, and the game engine works with it. Yet it will take a lot more testing to ensure that every mod in the universe works, too.

 

And I want to ensure that whatever we do is also compatible with what Bluedanieru has already done.

 

The discussion over on the BSF forums led me to believe that Arthmoor might consider it with very little stack overhead.

 

I'm working on it. It will be tested against a lot of saves, with a very long alpha and beta cycle.

 

But I'm more concerned that racks are done, and the USKP 2.0 is released. Those are the priority!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been hoping someone could come up with a fix for the flora issue for a long time and agree that it would be great to have this in the USKP. However, I also agree that if it has the potential to mess up other stuff (sorry if I'm misunderstanding) it would be better to leave it out, until the issues (like trees/plants not being animated) can be ironed out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

since you have a flora mod that is fairly well used and praised why dont we use that?

 

Flora respawn fix by bluedanieru

Because it made a bunch of things static and prevented other plugins from modifying the same objects. For example, you should not use it with Touring Carriages. The very few logs I've moved don't have their Mora move, so they hang out in the air. And there was a snowberry or two, too.

 

There is a new 2.0 beta (based on the same underlying VMAD discussed here). That might work and play better with other plugins.

 

But as I mentioned, I'm working on a new strategy. There's room for more than one concept....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...