Unity Completed House Party [v1.4.1.13172 GoG] [Eek! Games]

[DojaCatFucker]

You realize you're on a piracy site which already illegally redistributes the game? Comply for what good reason? At that point, might as well comply to no piracy against their game.

Yes, I realize. And no, there is still a difference. I 100% know nobody on here gives a fuck, as little as I do. But should "officials" ever bother me, I have an "out" so to speak. And I never pirated their game - I own it on Steam and am simply modifying it for the sake of "because I can"

Second of all... thank you for your input, but I'm afraid it won't fly. Your whole example of people making Johnny Silverhand fuckable is EXACTLY what I was talking about: CDPR reached out and asked the person to take the content down, so they did (I would do the same in a heartbeat if Eek! Reached out to me). But other than that, no harm was ever done, so I guess "officially" that's about as much as you can do, without getting into an ugly legal dispute that nobody wants.

 

[RedAISkye]

Also many people here actually bought the game. It's just a good platform to talk.

I am one of them and my point still stands about there being no good reason to comply to any mod take-downs on a pirate site where the game itself is being illegally redistributed.

Developers can be held responsible (or at least get a lot of shit) if a mod puts something in a game or unlocks something in the game that was supposed to be hidden or not even in it. Remember "hot coffee".

Not only is your analogy invalid, it's also an anomaly. GTA was never a porn game so, obviously discovering something like a sex gameplay hidden in it would be a big deal.

It's DCF's decision to comply to such a request or not. It's neither mine nor yours. The best thing you can do is not to argue, but to keep a backup copy of the mod.

It's more about the principle behind doing so than anything. People will obviously preserve such mods on many mirrors just like hot coffee is still easily available so, that is not what I'm concerned with.

But should "officials" ever bother me

Again, this is a pirate site, why do you think the "officials" would ever go for a modder on a site where the game itself is being illegally redistributed?

CDPR reached out and asked the person to take the content down, so they did (I would do the same in a heartbeat if Eek! Reached out to me). But other than that, no harm was ever done, so I guess "officially" that's about as much as you can do, without getting into an ugly legal dispute that nobody wants.

You're comparing a small studio with a massive company like CDPR? These companies can legally take down any and every mods if they wanted to depending on where the mod is hosted at.
But, I don't think a small studio is capable of threatening a lawsuit, let alone to some random guy in a pirate site especially if they live on different sides of the world.

 

[DojaCatFucker]

Again, this is a pirate site, why do you think the "officials" would ever go for a modder on a site where the game itself is being illegally redistributed?

I never expected that to begin with. That's the beauty of it. Chill.

You're comparing a small studio with a massive company like CDPR? These companies can legally take down any and every mods if they wanted to depending on where the mod is hosted at. But, I don't think a small studio is capable of threatening a lawsuit, let alone to some random guy in a pirate site especially if they live on different sides of the world.

True. That's one reason why I'm not concerned. But even if I *was* facing the likes of CDPR (or bigger) I would still have no issues with challenging them, because the whole concept of what constitutes a "valid, allowed" modification of their games is not written anywhere, as long as they allow modding of their game in the first place and don't clarify.

 

[Nemo56]

It's more about the principle behind doing so than anything.

So what are the principles that people should follow who are posting in a forum that also is used for distributing pirated software?

Not only is your analogy invalid, it's also an anomaly. GTA was never a porn game so, obviously discovering something like a sex gameplay hidden in it would be a big deal.

Ah, the olf 'invalid argument' "argument" That's always good if you can't counter it. No, just because one game focuses on shooting people and the other focuses on screwing people, the rules don't change. Also sex scenes in GTA are not uncommon, they are just not as explicit as in other games.
Really, what's the difference (apart from "but this is a porn game...")? Both are games, both have unused assets, both are not meant for children. In both cases the devs can get into into problems. There is a reason why programmers (or texture artists, whatever) are forbidden to add easter eggs on their own.
I too am forbidden to add stuff to my software the company does not know about because they can be held responsible if I screw such stuff up.

 

[RedAISkye]

So what are the principles that people should follow who are posting in a forum that also is used for distributing pirated software?

I'm pointing out the inconsistency with such stance of thinking it's okay for devs to take-down mods but also being okay with illegally redistributing the game especially when we are talking about a pirate site and not some official site where they follow copyright laws and stuff. If you care so much about legality to easily comply with a "request" against mods then you shouldn't be engaging with piracy either.

Ah, the olf 'invalid argument' "argument" That's always good if you can't counter it.

I said your "analogy" was invalid, not the argument itself.

No, just because one game focuses on shooting people and the other focuses on screwing people, the rules don't change. Also sex scenes in GTA are not uncommon, they are just not as explicit as in other games.

That was explaining exactly why your analogy was invalid. I didn't dismiss your point by just saying "invalid" like you're pretending it out to be.

Sure, there are sexual themes in GTA but that's nowhere comparable to having an entire "sex gameplay" so, no shit it was a big deal.
The same can't be said for say if GTA locked players out on acting violent against a certain character but modders made it possible which is comparable to a porn game locking players out on acting sexually.

Really, what's the difference (apart from "but this is a porn game...")? Both are games, both have unused assets, both are not meant for children. In both cases the devs can get into into problems.

The difference is that one focuses on sex and the other doesn't. So, it's a big deal for one when there's something like a "sex gameplay" hidden underneath meanwhile it wouldn't be anything for a porn game that already focuses on such aspect.

So, it's dumb as fuck for the devs to agree to add DC but not allow any sexual interactions with her in a porn game and expect people to not mod the game to allow sexual interactions with her.

 

[Nemo56]

If a file hoster gets a requests by the rights owner to remove a file, they do ... and there goes your immagined inconsistency.

Also the change made to GTA didn't add anything explicit, the chars were both fully dressed and GTA also already had optional sex in it (hookers). The changes to HP in this case are by far more drastic than what was done in GTA.
It really makes absolutely no difference what the game is about. Just because a game has sexual content does not mean the rules and laws don't apply. It's not about how many nipples or more private parts are shown, it's about adding something unauthorized.
In this specific case: If content is added with her likeness she didn't agree with, she can sue, plain and simple, no matter if the game is about sex or not.
You don't really think the judge will say "put it's a porn game, what did she expect?", do you? The times where the victims could be blamed are over for a couple of years now.

 

[RedAISkye]

You don't really think the judge will say "put it's a porn game, what did she expect?", do you? The times where the victims could be blamed are over for a couple of years now.

Ah, yes, she's truly a "victim" for her fictional character getting banged in a porn game and pirates and modders are all big bad criminals right?

If a file hoster gets a requests by the rights owner to remove a file, they do ... and there goes your immagined inconsistency.

I was talking about your inconsistency where you think certain mods are immoral meanwhile engaging with piracy which is already illegal.

 

[RedAISkye]

Yes. Her personal rights get violated if that happens. From a legal point of view not all that different from a deepfake.

A fictional character depicting her is not her actual real life body for it to be "violated".
Someone could make an original fanart/animation of her fictional character getting banged.

Deepfake takes the person's actual real life picture/video into another IRL pornography which is completely different from a fictional character in a fictional world made of pixels. By the dumb logic of giving fictional characters "rights" that you're using, I take it you're also one of those that think lolicons in anime is "immoral"? If so, I'll save myself from wasting more of my time.

I never said it was immoral. Where do you find me saying it's a bad thing?

Literally right here:-

we don't need to defend a immoral decision.

You think piracy is immoral yet you're here on a pirate site. Yeah, not going to take you seriously when you're inconsistent with your own moral standards.

 

[Nemo56]

Literally right here:-

Only if you ignore all the context. Here only is a :-
See? I can ignore context as well.

 

[RedAISkye]

The character in HP was intentionally designed to look like her. They would not have had the right to do so if she didn't agree. And she did - with conditions.

She made a deal with the dev, yes, not with us.
And I already told you why the dev shouldn't have agreed to such deal to begin with.

And she could rightfully sue that someone. It just rarely happens that people got sued for fan art. But it did happen already in some cases (even hand drawn is not allowed).

People can sue for anything, I'm not talking about legality here nor do I agree with such legal rights as I believe in freedom of artistic expression whether it offends someone or not.

Deepfake/Photoshop or whatever uses a photo of someone put over someone or something else. The 3D model was created in a similar way. It's all just pixels in a fictional world of video codecs.

Nope, creating art, whether it's 2D or sculpted 3D using a subject as a reference is completely different from taking someone's actual real life pictures/videos and manipulating it.

 

[Nemo56]

You win. Have fun

 

[RedAISkye]

Only if you ignore all the context. Here only is a :-
See? I can ignore context as well.

You mean the context of where you're conflating morality with legality?

Do people have the right to fuck someone legally over digital/fictional shit?(piracy/mods/fanarts) Of course but is that really a moral thing to do just because you have the legal right to do so? Nope.

Take a look at Take-Two Interactive's history and maybe, you'll get the idea of what I'm talking about.

 

[cesid]

Main error of developers isn't adding Doja Cat, but leaving just a small warning that she didn't had sex interactions. Nobody complained about not being able to do sex with Grumps. Then everyone complained about Doja. Why? It was revealed some pages ago: it is the *singer* "bitch I'm a cow" but Eek did like her fans were lawyers that read every small sentence in their site, instead they were outraged and did tons of negative reviews.
I am a little worried because the next update seems to be another DLC, a pornstar this time but the house is already crowded. I am worried mainly because if they get the DLC it will be more convenient for them to release every few months a DLC of 5-10 $ instead of working in the next title.

Second of all... thank you for your input, but I'm afraid it won't fly. Your whole example of people making Johnny Silverhand fuckable is EXACTLY what I was talking about: CDPR reached out and asked the person to take the content down, so they did (I would do the same in a heartbeat if Eek! Reached out to me). But other than that, no harm was ever done, so I guess "officially" that's about as much as you can do, without getting into an ugly legal dispute that nobody wants.

Where this legend come from? The only unskippable sex scene that you get regardless your choices is the one with Silverhand in the main quest. The other are tamer and come from optional romancing.

 

[ScottyLQ]

Any mods out there to enable repeatable scenes with Madison after finishing her route, and for taking the facepaint off Leah in the main original story?

 

[DojaCatFucker]

Well... fuck. The most recent House Party update, as of today, broke the mod - not so much that I didn't expect it, but they also seem to have introduced additional security methods to basically make Doja Cat "unfuckable" lol (I would like to think that this was a direct response to my efforts, but oh well, maybe just a funny coincidence).

Specifically: I've got the mod working again, however she's now permanently pixelated (even with censorship option turned off), and they removed all sex position data from her character; meaning that if you initiate sex with her, she'll just stand in a regular idle pose... completely screwing up the animation.

I already have an idea how to (hopefully) solve this, but it'll take more time. But of course it's also very much possible that it just wasn't meant to be; in which case I'll be left with no other option than to convert the mod into a "general purpose enhancement project" instead, leaving Doja untouched but adding other quality of life features.

If anything, the whole "jizz on her without getting beaten up" thing still works.

/edit: nevermind, new censorship wasn't a match for me after all LOL the mod is back up and working for the current game version 1.0.3 (I've included the previous version for 1.0.2.2 as well, just for the sake of backwards compatibility until the F95 download is updated). And I even did y'all one better: I've now added vocalization for Doja Cat, too - so she's no longer dead silent during sex.

Please download again from the original link if your game is on version 1.0.3 now.

Cheers

 

[Nemo56]

Well... fuck. The most recent House Party update, as of today, broke the mod - not so much that I didn't expect it, but they also seem to have introduced additional security methods to basically make Doja Cat "unfuckable" lol (I would like to think that this was a direct response to my efforts, but oh well, maybe just a funny coincidence).
...

I guess those who read your warning are creating a backup copy of the current version now if they haven't done so already
Even GOG got the new version already.

On a sidenote: I am pretty sure you are to honor for this, we had seen Eek people follow this thread in the past.
If not for a mod, then there would be no reason to change these things.
(to anyone reading this: there is talk about 'blame', so don't try to misinterpret this by force)

 

[DojaCatFucker]

I guess those who read your warning are creating a backup copy of the current version now if they haven't done so already
Even GOG got the new version already.

On a sidenote: I am pretty sure you are to honor for this, we had seen Eek people follow this thread in the past.
If not for a mod, then there would be no reason to change these things.
(to anyone reading this: there is talk about 'blame', so don't try to misinterpret this by force)

Eh, I'll be completely honest with you... I'm a programmer at heart, so this entire thing really just started out as kind of a "challenge" for me, to see what I can do to a Unity game. No particular reason why I specifically picked House Party - it just fell into my lap as it was. The whole controversy around the DLC of course helped a bit, I won't lie. After all, it just feels fitting if you can practice some coding while at the same time trying to give people what they wanted.

But frankly, should this "cat & mouse" game continue, meaning: new censorship in the next update or whatever... once it starts getting too bothersome, I'll probably drop support for the mod entirely and move on to something else. That being said - no need to frantically make backup copies for now I've already updated the mod to 1.0.3 as mentioned in my previous post.

 

[Nemo56]

The change log does mention that one outfit was censored too heavily and the undressed state not enough, so let's just call it a "bugfix"

 

[p22]

Yes, Amala's leaf outfit, if you put the game to censored in options, would censor her whole body in 1.0.2.2.
And that was fixed in 1.0.3, probably by editing what part of the body is supposed to be censored.

 

[NativeOrigin]

I bought the game in 2017 and got a 2nd copy on GOG.

What's the difference between a game like Indy4 and HP? You speak as if you think a porn game (or the porn industry itself?) is not serious business. The porn industry decided the video tape war between VHS and Betamax and was also one of the main reasons for the success of DVD.

For Eek games this is no joke, it's money. And if they plan to have more guest stars in their games, they better make sure that those people don't get insulted.

Bro. you know what site you're on. quit crying because people are doing what the entire point of this site is for. free erotic games. if you don't like it don't use this site. but this whole "holy than thou" shit is annoying. it's like going to pornhub and then saying "porns a sin don't watch"... whoever you think you're going to convince, it's not on this website. if you really feel so bad, go buy a bunch of copies of the game. it's not our job to make the developer rich.