How to confirm if the script has been applied correctly: - open console (~) and target Piper/Curie/Cait by left clicking on them - write "say CA_Event_ChemUse_Cait" (_Piper or _Curie for other two) - hit Enter+Up Arrow multiple times till it starts repeating - do it before and after applying the script to see the difference
After the script: Companion cycles between all original lines (should be 3 to 6 for vanilla ones)
Original mod: Companion remains silent because all available lines have been spoken already (or keeps repeating last line because 'Say Once' doesn't work as expected)
Hey, would mind updating your description so that it doesn't contain false information about what SCDO does? First you came onto to the SCDO mod page to spread false information, and now you resort to this. Not cool. Please refer to the permissions section of SCDO.
1) You've titled your mod: "Settler and Companion Dialogue Overhaul - Removed Dialogue Restorer", which is misleading. SCDO removes Preston saying "babe". That's it.
2) Your description is still inaccurate. While releasing this likely provided some catharsis, if your goal is other than to spread false information, it might be best to remove the SCDO references from your mod page and mod title. Again, I'll refer you back to the permissions section of SCDO.
It has nothing to do with spreading false information. I really like your mod, suggested some changes you didn't like, so I made them myself for my own use. And since it's in such a form that doesn't require permission, I thought why not to share it with community?
All this is, is a script that removes the key "say once" from dialogues which have been set to say as such now.
Your mod makes many dialogues become "say once," meaning they are only said once. This removes that. If that's somehow wrong, then explain how it's wrong. Otherwise, there is no false advertising here. Making dialogue set to "say once" removes that dialogue after it is said once, right? If that's not the case then explain what it does so no one bothers removing it.
Player Comment's patch does the same thing as this too but manually. Because your mod is so fantastic that people put in effort to remove a feature they didn't like just so they could keep all the awesome NEW content you made; it is _that_ necessary to their load order.
@Reshirou: There's no point when it's already been explained and the user who posted this file can just delete whatever I write. At this point I'm just writing this for the moderators, who have access to the deleted comments.
Pickysaurus and BigBiz: This file was posted 1) without permission, 2) in violation of the permission section on SCDO, 3) containing a highly misleading mod title, and 4) a plethora of inaccuracies, not all of which have been corrected.
I've never had a problem with others modifying my mods, even in amusing cases where someone showed me LoversLab did some weird stuff without permission. All I request is that someone ask permission. No one has ever been told "no". And even in cases where permission wasn't obtained, I've never said anything, and have even promoted some of those mods, provided the user understood what they were doing and wasn't altering anything that would break a mod.
This situation is a little different. User who posted this file first came to the SCDO page a while back hurling insults and misinformation. The misinformation user stated is on (currently) page 4 of the SCDO comments if you'd like to take a look. I explained where the user was mistaken.
User responded with more misinformation, followed by: "I work on engine/C++ level (the next stage of evolvement) and I can teach you about programming/technical stuff. You make some quest based mods, but you are nobody in gameplay modding scene so please don't make yourself look like some modding god."
I responded to the second round of misinformation. The user then posted this file, containing (initially) a wildly inaccurate description page, a (still) misleading mod title, still inaccurate mod page, and misleading comments.
This file was not posted in good faith, and this user is not acting in good faith.
He said this doesn't use any assets from any mod, I have no idea if this is true nor I can verify it since your file is hidden, but if that is true... then he could have called it "Thuggysmurf is a pinky unicorn" and even then it would still NOT require any permissions from you.
If he instead used assets from your mod, then and only then you are in the right.
This mod does not use any assets from the original mod. It is a script that has to be inserted into FO4Edit. Then, when run in FO4Edit, it makes changes that removes the "run once" flag added to dialog. You could also do it manually, but that would take a lot of time. This just provides an automated utility to accomplish it.
There may be some "legal" technicalities here, since the original mod did state that permission was required to make any updates or fixes for the mod. But, that's for admins to decide. All this drama IS completely unnecessary. There seems to be an excess of it from both sides.
Hi Richwizard. I'll address your point because it's a fair one. I've done a few mods, currently 5 in the top 100 of Top Files, so they get some downloads, and with that a lot of comments, and a fair amount of user error, often from people who don't read the mod page and/or don't understand how the 'Ctrl F" function on their keyboard works, so they can't find information. I try to help where I can, but it's time consuming.
For example sometimes users will download broken quest mods (e.g. stuff that overrides), and those overrides will affect the base game and other mods. Those bug reports end up coming my way, because odds are close to 100% if a user is playing any quest mod on FO4 Nexus, they also have at least one of SCDO, Depravity, PV, OAR, or FCR installed. Nothing I can do there, that's just how it is. As Kris Takahashi says, "Welcome to your new customer service job."
Except we don't get paid. Mod authors release mods and support them with our free time. I want to mod, not do unpaid customer service. So I'm highly motivated to streamline information and put certain restrictions in place to prevent bugs. One of those restrictions is requiring permission to modify the way the mod works in any way, because I don't want to do unpaid customer service for someone else's mistake or lack of knowledge about how a mod works.
The person who posted this file didn't ask permission. They know I don't approve. They know this file is useless without SCDO being available. They keep the file up anyway, and they report mod authors who respond in-kind to this person's rude comments and insults, which is why there are some comment breaks here (deleted comments). What kind of person does that?
Hopefully that sheds some light. The more difficult either Nexus or Nexus users make it for mod authors to host mods here, generally the less mods you'll see, and it's unnecessary. Keep in mind mod authors are just people, providing content for free, and it's easier to do that when people are relatively polite and respectful in return. Mod author IP protections used to be stronger here, and that's eroding on multiple fronts. Most users may see this and not agree, that's fine, but I assure you other mod authors see this and it doesn't sit quite as well, which long term is not good for users either. We're are in the same boat here.
Other user's assets - it doesn't use ANY assets from ANY mod Upload permission - it isn't re-upload of ANY mod Modification permission - it isn't modification of ANY mod Conversion permission - it isn't conversion of ANY mod Asset use permission - it doesn't use ANY assets Asset use permission in mods/files that are being sold - it doesn't sell ANY assets Asset use permission in mods/files that earn donation points - it doesn't earn donations Console modding permission - it isn't available on Bethesda.net
Regarding "Modification Permission," this mod contains a script that is intended to modify the file to improve it. You could have been polite and asked permission. Thuggysmurf might have given it. I'm a modder myself. I've never had a problem giving permission. I just like to know what's being done with my mods before I say "yes."
z4x writes: "Modification permission - it isn't modification of ANY mod" (quoting before it gets edited)
You named the mod: "Settler and Companion Dialogue Overhaul - Removed Dialogue Restorer".
What exactly is your motivation in: 1) Naming it that? 2) Making all the false statements you originally made about SCDO on this mod page/comments (most of which you've since deleted/amended when called on it)?
If you are now claiming the file you have posted doesn't modify anything: 1) Why reference SCDO at all? 2) Why keep this file up at all, if your motivation is other than attention seeking?
It's tool to make mods but it isn't the mod itself. Are you going to bash FO4Edit only because it can be used to edit your mod? Wow, dude you feel so entitled, it's pointless arguing with you.
FO4Edit is wonderful. By the way, they have a Patreon account if anyone is interested in supporting further development of that tool.
Z4x: I'm used to insults, fire away, but these are some pretty basic questions. Would you mind answering them so that users and Nexus moderators can better understand your motivations here? Thank you.
Load this script up in FO4Edit, run it and any mod that has the say once entry added to a vanilla dialogue record will have it removed and then you have to let FO4Edit save any mod that it effects. I do not believe this is a good thing for people to do. You probably would have been better off asking Thuggysmurf if you could create a patch to do that - copy over the records into a new file and manually remove the say once edits or running your script on the patch file.
It doesn't run on every mod with "say once" flags. It will only run on the one mod you right click on when you select "apply script" from the drop down list.
Thuggy please provide us with a straight answer; you keep saying vague things like "I've already answered my problems before" but none of us understand:
what is, exactly, your issue with this FO4Edit script?
It removes the "say once" flag on some dialogue, making it so once they're said, they're no longer removed- restoring that dialogue to reply. That's where the title came from.
Everyone here loves your mods and loves you for making them (and everyone else on the teams who help you, the author/co author, along the way of course) and nobody understands what the issue is here. Regardless of z4x's behaviour in response to confusion.
Let's pretend, for my question, that I or Richwizard made the script, since I assume we're neutral to you?
I will screenshot and make a wayback archive of your response so there can be no tampering by z4x or moderation, if that were to happen
"no response" is technically also a valid response, and so is DM'ing if I'm so important enough haha
The Nexus moderators have deleted posts when I've answered that on Nexus, as is their right to do. I support Nexus moderators 100% and do not in any way question their moderation decisions. Your answer is also on Discord.
I didn`t like him removing `babe` (why, due to ideological reasons?) but when i spoke about this it`s basically his way or the highway. He even removed a whole comment I made and I was not rude at all. This guy is getting a bit too full of himself - and rude with it.
There aren't any ideological reason behind, they just love hating on Preston. An another settlement need your help... blah blah blah meme. Just watch one of the upcoming quest for Depravity : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTUhbgHC3kM It's a childish decision they decided to take to make everything about Preston worse and make him pay for... being badly designed by Bethesda.
Re: Preston and "babe" being removed. We take honest feedback seriously, and the consensus of female users was that they wanted Preston not to say "babe".
Some players also dislike Preston and the game mechanics he forces on the player, which is why options are provided via other mods to give the player greater choice with respect to Preston. The existence of a choice in a video game does not mean you have to choose that outcome. You can make your own choices. If another player chooses an outcome you don't agree with, and they show that option in a YouTube video, hopefully you don't view that as infringing on your rights. Some people do, and will complain online about the mere existence of options they wouldn't choose personally or are too embarrassed to admit they chose (e.g. many are reluctant to admit they use CBBE, yet it is the #1 mod on Fallout 4 Nexus).
Re: this "restorer mod", it was made out of spite and to seek attention, it gets an average of 1 download per day, and it was released in violation of the SCDO mod permissions, which anyone is free to read. At this point the "restorer" mod exists primarily for purposes of harassment and to serve as a forum for unsubstantiated claims. That isn't what Nexus is supposed to be about.
If you have constructive feedback or something useful to contribute, feel free to visit the Project Valkyrie Discord Server and let us know.
That's BS. I don't write Bethesda a polite little e-mail telling them that I intend to mod their game and I don't ask mod authors for permission to modify their mods. If what you release requires their mod to function and your changes are your own work then they have nothing to stand on. Thuggysmurf needs to grow thicker skin. His crying all over mod pages is frankly embarrassing. Settler Companion Dialogue Overhaul sucks anyway. It takes companion dialogue and changes it from repetitive to repetitive and nonsensical. I uninstalled it.
Yeah I think this is about the title. Hell I would have just called it SCDO for short and slap a community tag on it or something just to stop all the fuss.
I do get where Thuggysmurf is coming from tho, he is just worried people will think this is part of his mod and then have to debug it for those who use it without realizing its a community patch.
Just a quick note to try to bump down that cancerous debate (seriously folks, stop replying to it) and to mention thanks for the script! Does exactly what it says on the tin, and useful for a wide variety of purposes and/or as a basis for other dialogue tweaks, not just deleting the Say Once flags from the mod mentioned in the title.
So hey, in order to be able to download the original SCDO, you have been requested to hide/remove this mod. I would really like to download that mod but cannot, so would you please comply with the original mod authors wishes and do so?
problem here as i see it is using this will increase the chances of getting some generic line or another we've all heard thousands of times before instead of one of the newly added lines from Thuggy's mod. I mean it has to doesn't it. There's only so many dialogue choices and its all down to percentages. Can't see why I would want that But each to their own :) Title is misleading though
It is. Thuggysmurf's mod is a great idea. I wanted to use it but I didn't agree with the "use once" setting. With this FO4Edit script, we can try it both ways. However, this is not a game file. It only works for people that know how to use FO4Edit.
It increases the pool of available dialogue lines at given time. Once all flagged dialogue (1000 lines) has been spoken, you are left with just 2000 new lines (some are flagged too but I didn't touch them), plus vanilla dialogue that hasn't been flagged. With "Say Once" flags removed every dialogue line is available at all times (2000 new + 1000 previously flagged + remaining vanilla).
SCDO also sets 'Say Once' flag on all event related comments such as reaction to chem, drinking, looting etc, without adding any new lines reducing variety to zero (npc will mostly stay silent or repeat the last available line because AFAIK "Say Once" flag is bugged).
Well I use Thuggys mod and I can say that I am not feeling deprived of dialogues lol. I haven't looked into dialogue that closely since Skyrim but the system isn't that different, I'm not convinced Z4X has understood things correctly, However that's a horses for courses thing and up to the user to decide, endless repetition of the same old lines over and over or something fresh and interesting..
I do feel the title is misleading and deliberately inflammatory, given the only dialogue 'removed' in Thuggy's mod was one word. Whatever the rights and wrongs of what this mod is trying to do that was unecessary.
It is a matter of facts, which is why I'm surprised you chose to report a user to Nexus Admin for calling you out on them. Moot point, SCDO is now set to hidden.
68 comments
- open console (~) and target Piper/Curie/Cait by left clicking on them
- write "say CA_Event_ChemUse_Cait" (_Piper or _Curie for other two)
- hit Enter+Up Arrow multiple times till it starts repeating
- do it before and after applying the script to see the difference
After the script:
Companion cycles between all original lines (should be 3 to 6 for vanilla ones)
Original mod:
Companion remains silent because all available lines have been spoken already
(or keeps repeating last line because 'Say Once' doesn't work as expected)
2) Your description is still inaccurate. While releasing this likely provided some catharsis, if your goal is other than to spread false information, it might be best to remove the SCDO references from your mod page and mod title. Again, I'll refer you back to the permissions section of SCDO.
Your mod makes many dialogues become "say once," meaning they are only said once. This removes that. If that's somehow wrong, then explain how it's wrong. Otherwise, there is no false advertising here. Making dialogue set to "say once" removes that dialogue after it is said once, right? If that's not the case then explain what it does so no one bothers removing it.
Player Comment's patch does the same thing as this too but manually. Because your mod is so fantastic that people put in effort to remove a feature they didn't like just so they could keep all the awesome NEW content you made; it is _that_ necessary to their load order.
Pickysaurus and BigBiz: This file was posted 1) without permission, 2) in violation of the permission section on SCDO, 3) containing a highly misleading mod title, and 4) a plethora of inaccuracies, not all of which have been corrected.
I've never had a problem with others modifying my mods, even in amusing cases where someone showed me LoversLab did some weird stuff without permission. All I request is that someone ask permission. No one has ever been told "no". And even in cases where permission wasn't obtained, I've never said anything, and have even promoted some of those mods, provided the user understood what they were doing and wasn't altering anything that would break a mod.
This situation is a little different. User who posted this file first came to the SCDO page a while back hurling insults and misinformation. The misinformation user stated is on (currently) page 4 of the SCDO comments if you'd like to take a look. I explained where the user was mistaken.
User responded with more misinformation, followed by: "I work on engine/C++ level (the next stage of evolvement) and I can teach you about programming/technical stuff. You make some quest based mods, but you are nobody in gameplay modding scene so please don't make yourself look like some modding god."
I responded to the second round of misinformation. The user then posted this file, containing (initially) a wildly inaccurate description page, a (still) misleading mod title, still inaccurate mod page, and misleading comments.
This file was not posted in good faith, and this user is not acting in good faith.
He said this doesn't use any assets from any mod, I have no idea if this is true nor I can verify it since your file is hidden, but if that is true... then he could have called it "Thuggysmurf is a pinky unicorn" and even then it would still NOT require any permissions from you.
If he instead used assets from your mod, then and only then you are in the right.
There may be some "legal" technicalities here, since the original mod did state that permission was required to make any updates or fixes for the mod. But, that's for admins to decide. All this drama IS completely unnecessary. There seems to be an excess of it from both sides.
For example sometimes users will download broken quest mods (e.g. stuff that overrides), and those overrides will affect the base game and other mods. Those bug reports end up coming my way, because odds are close to 100% if a user is playing any quest mod on FO4 Nexus, they also have at least one of SCDO, Depravity, PV, OAR, or FCR installed. Nothing I can do there, that's just how it is. As Kris Takahashi says, "Welcome to your new customer service job."
Except we don't get paid. Mod authors release mods and support them with our free time. I want to mod, not do unpaid customer service. So I'm highly motivated to streamline information and put certain restrictions in place to prevent bugs. One of those restrictions is requiring permission to modify the way the mod works in any way, because I don't want to do unpaid customer service for someone else's mistake or lack of knowledge about how a mod works.
The person who posted this file didn't ask permission. They know I don't approve. They know this file is useless without SCDO being available. They keep the file up anyway, and they report mod authors who respond in-kind to this person's rude comments and insults, which is why there are some comment breaks here (deleted comments). What kind of person does that?
Hopefully that sheds some light. The more difficult either Nexus or Nexus users make it for mod authors to host mods here, generally the less mods you'll see, and it's unnecessary. Keep in mind mod authors are just people, providing content for free, and it's easier to do that when people are relatively polite and respectful in return. Mod author IP protections used to be stronger here, and that's eroding on multiple fronts. Most users may see this and not agree, that's fine, but I assure you other mod authors see this and it doesn't sit quite as well, which long term is not good for users either. We're are in the same boat here.
Upload permission - it isn't re-upload of ANY mod
Modification permission - it isn't modification of ANY mod
Conversion permission - it isn't conversion of ANY mod
Asset use permission - it doesn't use ANY assets
Asset use permission in mods/files that are being sold - it doesn't sell ANY assets
Asset use permission in mods/files that earn donation points - it doesn't earn donations
Console modding permission - it isn't available on Bethesda.net
You named the mod: "Settler and Companion Dialogue Overhaul - Removed Dialogue Restorer".
What exactly is your motivation in:
1) Naming it that?
2) Making all the false statements you originally made about SCDO on this mod page/comments (most of which you've since deleted/amended when called on it)?
If you are now claiming the file you have posted doesn't modify anything:
1) Why reference SCDO at all?
2) Why keep this file up at all, if your motivation is other than attention seeking?
Wow, dude you feel so entitled, it's pointless arguing with you.
Z4x: I'm used to insults, fire away, but these are some pretty basic questions. Would you mind answering them so that users and Nexus moderators can better understand your motivations here? Thank you.
You probably would have been better off asking Thuggysmurf if you could create a patch to do that - copy over the records into a new file and manually remove the say once edits or running your script on the patch file.
what is, exactly, your issue with this FO4Edit script?
It removes the "say once" flag on some dialogue, making it so once they're said, they're no longer removed- restoring that dialogue to reply. That's where the title came from.
Everyone here loves your mods and loves you for making them (and everyone else on the teams who help you, the author/co author, along the way of course) and nobody understands what the issue is here. Regardless of z4x's behaviour in response to confusion.
Let's pretend, for my question, that I or Richwizard made the script, since I assume we're neutral to you?
I will screenshot and make a wayback archive of your response so there can be no tampering by z4x or moderation, if that were to happen
"no response" is technically also a valid response, and so is DM'ing if I'm so important enough haha
An another settlement need your help... blah blah blah meme.
Just watch one of the upcoming quest for Depravity : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTUhbgHC3kM
It's a childish decision they decided to take to make everything about Preston worse and make him pay for... being badly designed by Bethesda.
Some players also dislike Preston and the game mechanics he forces on the player, which is why options are provided via other mods to give the player greater choice with respect to Preston. The existence of a choice in a video game does not mean you have to choose that outcome. You can make your own choices. If another player chooses an outcome you don't agree with, and they show that option in a YouTube video, hopefully you don't view that as infringing on your rights. Some people do, and will complain online about the mere existence of options they wouldn't choose personally or are too embarrassed to admit they chose (e.g. many are reluctant to admit they use CBBE, yet it is the #1 mod on Fallout 4 Nexus).
Re: this "restorer mod", it was made out of spite and to seek attention, it gets an average of 1 download per day, and it was released in violation of the SCDO mod permissions, which anyone is free to read. At this point the "restorer" mod exists primarily for purposes of harassment and to serve as a forum for unsubstantiated claims. That isn't what Nexus is supposed to be about.
If you have constructive feedback or something useful to contribute, feel free to visit the Project Valkyrie Discord Server and let us know.
The modding community is meant to share, guys. That's how we get better cross-compatibility with other mods.
Hell I would have just called it SCDO for short and slap a community tag on it or something just to stop all the fuss.
I do get where Thuggysmurf is coming from tho, he is just worried people will think this is part of his mod and then have to debug it for those who use it without realizing its a community patch.
It's still up.
Can't see why I would want that
But each to their own :)
Title is misleading though
SCDO also sets 'Say Once' flag on all event related comments such as reaction to chem, drinking, looting etc, without adding any new lines reducing variety to zero (npc will mostly stay silent or repeat the last available line because AFAIK "Say Once" flag is bugged).
I haven't looked into dialogue that closely since Skyrim but the system isn't that different, I'm not convinced Z4X has understood things correctly,
However that's a horses for courses thing and up to the user to decide, endless repetition of the same old lines over and over or something fresh and interesting..
I do feel the title is misleading and deliberately inflammatory, given the only dialogue 'removed' in Thuggy's mod was one word. Whatever the rights and wrongs of what this mod is trying to do that was unecessary.
This message show up in FO4Edit while applying script. Is it normal?