Scenes In the forest

[ZRSX]

ZRSX submitted a new resource:

In the forest - A new small voyeur scene

What is this?
This is a small voyeur scene taking place in the woods.

View attachment 105134

You can switch between various behaviors & you've got a bunch of options to play with, so you can make your favorite setup.

View attachment 105135


Shall we take a tour?...

Read more about this resource...

 

[RandomVAMUser]

@ZRSX
Hm... so first you set high standard by creating this guide (how to reduce nonsense inside package ...like a "pro"):

Guides - How to package like a pro: a guide on proper VAR building

Intro There is a recurring issue with VAR packaging. No one's to blame, really, as there is no guide on how to make a "good" VAR package. I'll try to remedy to that. In short, this guide is for you: If you’re about to post a resource starting...

hub.virtamate.com

....and than you decided to redistribute (make duplicate) with 'vam included' loose hairstyle (Jackaroo/LeePompadour)? ...like a "noob"
jk

 

[ZRSX]

....and than you decided to redistribute (make duplicate) with 'vam included' loose hairstyle (Jackaroo/LeePompadour)? ...like a "noob"
jk

Haha! Well, I had no choice in that matter (other than not using this hairstyle).
Prepping the package automatically adds this - I don't know why: as you said it's VAM-included. Looks like a bug.
I decided not to care seeing the size of those files

 

[RandomVAMUser]

Prepping the package automatically adds this

Naturally...you remove it afterwards (before finalizing), so you don't create dupes?
That's how it goes with loose (local) vam included files.

I don't know why: as you said it's VAM-included. Looks like a bug.

By default it is ("VaM included"), true, not as var package or hardcoded inside client.
If you don't include it (remove before finalizing) it still works.

 

[ZRSX]

By default it is ("VaM included"), true, not as var package or hardcoded inside client.
If you don't include it (remove before finalizing) it still works.

Thanks for the info! As it appeared as "Fixable" I thought VAM would consider the package as "broken" if I removed it. I'll give it a try!

 

[RandomVAMUser]

I thought VAM would consider the package as "broken" if I removed it. I'll give it a try!

That is true for 'actual' custom loose content (you wanna include everything),
there will be reference errors/issues if you don't (you can manually remove them from meta...i personally can't be bothered with it)

take my concepts as example:
"hadReferenceIssues" : "true",
"referenceIssues" : [
{
"reference" : "Custom/Scripts/MeshedVR/CycleForce.cs",
"issue" : "FIXABLE: References local file not included in package"
},
{
"reference" : "Custom/Scripts/MeshedVR/FloatParamRandomizer.cs",
"issue" : "FIXABLE: References local file not included in package"
}
obviously everyone have CycleForce.cs & FloatParamRandomizer.cs inside Scripts/MeshedVR by default.

or from generic looks:
"hadReferenceIssues" : "true",
"referenceIssues" : [
{
"reference" : "Custom/Hair/Female/RenVR/RenVR/Lexi Long (REN).vam",
"issue" : "FIXABLE: References local file not included in package"
}
the infamous loose hairstyles...that are duplicated about 'gazillion' times by now....

 

[ZRSX]

That is true for 'actual' custom loose content (you wanna include everything),
there will be reference errors/issues if you don't (you can manually remove them from meta...i personally can't be bothered with it)

Ok, so that's indeed what I thought: there is no way to cleanly remove it without triggering a "package issue".

Yeah, I'm a bit torn about this. Either I leave it as is (with this buggy duplicate), or I'll remove the duplicate and fix the meta.json. I don't like having "Package content issues" ^^'
But manually fixing the meta.json file feels a bit like cheating the packaging system... which is buggy on that aspect, so it's kind of ok?

I'm wondering what would be the "official" Hub position on this matter. If there is a Hub moderator around here: care to shed some light on this?

 

[RandomVAMUser]

Yeah, I'm a bit torn about this. Either I leave it as is (with this buggy duplicate), or I'll remove the duplicate and fix the meta.json. I don't like having "Package content issues" ^^'

Image on this resource is great example (for those loose 'vam included' content).

Hairstyles - Lexi Long (REN)

This is the Lexi Long hair that is included on vam in custom folder, but this have a problem, because when a creator make his design with this hair it's added into the var so this creates multiple duplicates of the same hair. See the screenshots...

hub.virtamate.com

But manually fixing the meta.json file feels a bit like cheating the packaging system... which is buggy on that aspect, so it's kind of ok?

Some creators remove sub-dependencies... what can i say... it just works™

I'm wondering what would be the "official" Hub position on this matter. If there is a Hub moderator around here: care to shed some light on this?