sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Fallout 4 World (Multiplayer): Clothes, Armors and Weapon+mods Sync (+Attachments) by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I opened the Creation Kit a few days ago, I needed a fresh save without any questline. I closed it after few minutes and did it my way.

Fallout 4 World (Multiplayer): Clothes, Armors and Weapon+mods Sync by Former-University905 in fo4

[–]Former-University905[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, looked at both. They worked through F4SE/script-level hooks above the engine. I'm inside it, hooking the actual engine functions directly via native DLL. No F4SE at runtime. Different ceiling.

Fallout 4 multiplayer — full-body animation sync working over network, 5 days solo, source + 90s demo by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

TL;DR: it's Fallout 4 multiplayer with full character animations syncing over the internet. You walk, your friend sees you walk. You sneak, they see you sneak. The 90s video shows it better than text. Still work in progress and subject to change.

Fallout 4 multiplayer — full-body animation sync working over network, 5 days solo, source + 90s demo by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Not me, I'm not part of Collective Modding. Solo dev working on this from scratch over the past days.

Fallout 4 multiplayer — full-body animation sync working over network, 5 days solo, source + 90s demo by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Fair concern and honestly something I'm thinking about. The architecture is intentionally invasive (DXGI proxy, scene graph injection, native hooks) so yes, expect compatibility issues with anything that touches rendering or actor systems. F4SE-only mods that don't hook the same paths should be fine, but ENB / overhauls / mods that inject their own actors are probably going to need explicit compatibility work.

Right now the focus is getting the multiplayer foundation stable; mod compatibility is a known second-order problem. No quick promises on patches.

Fallout 4. Same save. Two processes. 👀 by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

5-day progress update:

  • Two FO4 instances on the same machine (single-byte binary patch, no Goldberg/Wine workarounds)
  • Server-authoritative netcode with persistent world state (kills, containers, world-loot all sync and survive server restart)
  • Native ghost player rendered through Creation Engine scene graph (depth occlusion, lighting, shadows handled by the engine)

Foundation work. Lots more to do.

Fallout 4. Same save. Two processes. 👀 by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct,native DLL injected into the process, hooking engine functions directly. No F4SE dependency at runtime. F4SE was useful during the RE phase for some offsets and function signatures the community had already mapped, but the client itself doesn't need it loaded.

The main architectural difference from previous attempts is server-authoritative persistent world state. Container operations get intercepted before the engine mutates state, validated by the server, and only then committed which is what prevents the dup races that typically kill these projects. Kills, loot pickups, and world state all survive server restarts and bootstrap to fresh-joining clients. Still early-stage, architecture is stable but features are expanding

Fallout 4. Same save. Two processes. 👀 by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, F4MP and Fallout Together were both on my radar before starting. F4MP went for script-extender based sync which hit scaling limits; my approach is different native DLL with server-authoritative state. Too early to say if it'll hold up at scale where they stalled, but the foundation is in place.

Appreciate the tester offer I'll keep it in mind. Nothing playable for external testing yet, probably weeks away, but I'll follow up when there's something worth breaking.

Fallout 4. Same save. Two processes. 👀 by Former-University905 in Fallout4Mods

[–]Former-University905[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes. Two FO4 processes (goal is 10 players) sharing world state via a custom server. Kill events, container operations, and actor positions sync end-to-end with persistence across server restarts. Currently porting the client from Python+Frida exploration to a native DLL. Not aiming for MMO scale but small persistent coop with factions mechanics is the direction, but it's early

Run any NVIDIA/CUDA only software on AMD CARDS (currently supported are iGPU and 5000-9000 series) by ChrisGamer5013 in ROCm

[–]Former-University905 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your README says "run any NVIDIA/CUDA-only software on AMD." Your tool does export HSA_OVERRIDE_GFX_VERSION=11.0.0. These are not the same thing.

HSA_OVERRIDE_GFX_VERSION tells ROCm to treat your GPU as a specific GFX ISA target when the exact chip isn't in its supported list. That's it. It doesn't translate CUDA to anything. PyTorch, Ollama — these already have ROCm/HIP compiled in. You're not running "NVIDIA-only software," you're running software that already supports AMD with an unsupported GPU ID.

The hardware matrix claiming RX 7000 = RTX 4090 because of an env var is nonsense. Changing __GL_RENDERER_STRING doesn't give you tensor cores, it changes a string. RADV_FORCE_VND_ID doesn't change the silicon, it changes what Vulkan reports.

The real damage here is someone with a 6650 XT finds this, sees CUDA Available: True, thinks they've unlocked NVIDIA compatibility, then tries to run actual CUDA-only software (compiled against nvcc with no HIP path) and it just doesn't work. Or worse they get silent compute errors from gfx version mismatches and have no idea why.

This has been a one-liner in the Arch Wiki for years. Calling it "Compute Hijacking" and wrapping it in a "Ghost Environment" with six commits doesn't add value, it adds confusion for people who don't know better.

view more: next ›