Did you ever figure out what this problem was caused by? I'm having the same thing, specifically, when I have the Biotech MK 1 its fine, but if I ever remove it and replace it with a different Cyberdeck it crashes the game.
I found the same issue, In particular with the Raven Mycrocyber MK.3, although I'm going to check whether the issue happens again with other Epic rarity cyberdecks, because I get the impression that's the issue.
I've managed to track down the problem line of code, although I'm not entirely sure how to fix it on my own. I know how to code, but this is the first time I'm actually looking at Lua scripting and this ain't even my code... :(
According to the logs in Cyberpunk 2077\bin\x64\plugins\cyber_engine_tweaks\mods\decks\decks.log, there's an exception that occurs when the game tries to check whether any cyberdeck of Epic rarity has been slotted (that was better than the previously slotted cyberdeck), and it causes an exception because the reference object (shardID) passed onto it isn't what the game's function is expecting (a gameItemID).
init.lua:102: Function 'GetItemRecord' parameter 1 must be gameItemID. stack traceback: [C]: in function 'GetItemRecord' init.lua:102: in function <init.lua:87> [C]: in ? [C]: in function 'wrapped' init.lua:41: in function <init.lua:40> [C]: in ?
Which corresponds with THIS particular line of code (3rd line): if cyberDeckQual == gamedataQuality.Legendary then return wrapped(obj, cyberdeckID, shardID) elseif LowerQualityCheck(cyberDeckQual, RPGManager.GetItemRecord(shardID):Quality():Type()) == false then --[[DEBUG CODE]] --print("Better quality than cyberdeck") return true else return wrapped(obj, cyberdeckID, shardID) end
Whatever object that's passed to the GetItemRecord fcn isn't what's expected.
Ok, yeah, confirmed. Don't slot any Epic rarity cyberdecks until the mod is updated, it's crashing to desktop every single time.
Nevermind, it's not just Epics. Whenever you slot better decks than you already had and you click on the Cyberdeck menu button, it just crashes. I downgraded to my original cyberdeck and the code just crashes in the same file. Hope the CyberpunkTHING team, fixes it soon. They're certainly aware of it, as z9r has mentioned it in the collection's forum, and they've removed it from the collection until it's fixed (which they've said they'll get to eventually).
there's a somewhat bug where if your intelligence is below 3 you can't get the militech paraline softlocking you in the tutorial mission when you're required to hack a door this is fine with just this mod as you can't set an attribute below 3 but if you have a mod called no character creation attribute restrictions and set your intelligence to below 3 it won't equip the paraline and you're stuck could the paraline be changed to have a default intelligence requirement of 0 to prevent softlocks if there's ever any future updates please I've just set that myself in mod settings so I'm fine but useful for others that have both mods installed
have you tried giving scanning a cooldown? it really should have been like that, gimme a few seconds in time-dilation to quickhack, then back to mixing in your combat
Hi! Thanks for the fix for the netdriver! Great work.
Question: What line would I need to add so that Contagion would spread to 3 targets initially too?
I just recently played cyberpunk for the first time. My friend played it in the beginning and he told me how back then netdriver contagion was badass and I wanted to experience that feeling from back then.
I have a strange bug report to make. Near the start of the game, you can talk to Meredith and get a card to give to Maelstrom. You can wipe the chip and get synapse burnout. Well, color me confused when I look in my inventory and I cannot even see the quick hack at all. Like I never picked it up. Tried to cheat it in with no result as well.
It took some digging but I have now learned that the rarity restrictions are causing this issue. They are on by default and they cause you to not even be able to see the quick hack if your chip isn't the right rarity.
Idk if this is a bug or intentional but it sure is confusing and disconcerting to anyone who doesn't know what is going on. I sure was concerned. Took me an hour to figure out what was causing it. (I have a lot of mods)
You should still be able to see it if you look in the Backpack UI or the vendor UI.
The way the cyberdeck quickhack programs sort is... special. We took the most straightforward path and just co-opted that system but limited the quality to what you could install (rather than massively rework it so that it'll show you a whole bunch of quickhacks you can't install).
I acknowledge that this is a sub-optimal result though. Sorry for causing you frustration!
34 comments
I've managed to track down the problem line of code, although I'm not entirely sure how to fix it on my own. I know how to code, but this is the first time I'm actually looking at Lua scripting and this ain't even my code... :(
According to the logs in Cyberpunk 2077\bin\x64\plugins\cyber_engine_tweaks\mods\decks\decks.log, there's an exception that occurs when the game tries to check whether any cyberdeck of Epic rarity has been slotted (that was better than the previously slotted cyberdeck), and it causes an exception because the reference object (shardID) passed onto it isn't what the game's function is expecting (a gameItemID).
init.lua:102: Function 'GetItemRecord' parameter 1 must be gameItemID.
stack traceback:
[C]: in function 'GetItemRecord'
init.lua:102: in function <init.lua:87>
[C]: in ?
[C]: in function 'wrapped'
init.lua:41: in function <init.lua:40>
[C]: in ?
Which corresponds with THIS particular line of code (3rd line):
if cyberDeckQual == gamedataQuality.Legendary then
return wrapped(obj, cyberdeckID, shardID)
elseif LowerQualityCheck(cyberDeckQual, RPGManager.GetItemRecord(shardID):Quality():Type()) == false then
--[[DEBUG CODE]] --print("Better quality than cyberdeck")
return true
else
return wrapped(obj, cyberdeckID, shardID)
end
Whatever object that's passed to the GetItemRecord fcn isn't what's expected.
Ok, yeah, confirmed. Don't slot any Epic rarity cyberdecks until the mod is updated, it's crashing to desktop every single time.
Nevermind, it's not just Epics. Whenever you slot better decks than you already had and you click on the Cyberdeck menu button, it just crashes. I downgraded to my original cyberdeck and the code just crashes in the same file. Hope the CyberpunkTHING team, fixes it soon. They're certainly aware of it, as z9r has mentioned it in the collection's forum, and they've removed it from the collection until it's fixed (which they've said they'll get to eventually).Guess im just unlucky, netdriver fix is not working on the latest steam version for me...reinstalled the mods and now its working nevermind xD
Question: What line would I need to add so that Contagion would spread to 3 targets initially too?
I just recently played cyberpunk for the first time. My friend played it in the beginning and he told me how back then netdriver contagion was badass and I wanted to experience that feeling from back then.
TweakDB:SetFlat("QuickHack.OverloadBaseHack_inline6.spreadCount", 3)
?I was unable to find out how "Contagion" would fit in there exactly.
Also just being curious. When I change the 3 in the end would it spread to even more targets?
Thank you for your time and effort. Have a nice day!
It took some digging but I have now learned that the rarity restrictions are causing this issue. They are on by default and they cause you to not even be able to see the quick hack if your chip isn't the right rarity.
Idk if this is a bug or intentional but it sure is confusing and disconcerting to anyone who doesn't know what is going on. I sure was concerned. Took me an hour to figure out what was causing it. (I have a lot of mods)
The way the cyberdeck quickhack programs sort is... special. We took the most straightforward path and just co-opted that system but limited the quality to what you could install (rather than massively rework it so that it'll show you a whole bunch of quickhacks you can't install).
I acknowledge that this is a sub-optimal result though. Sorry for causing you frustration!