2 replies to this topic

[Ascension64]

WARNING: Any post in this topic that deals more with whether the merger should take place rather than how it will work will be moved to http://www.shsforums...showtopic=18860. Ironically, but it shall remain so, my general stance on the methods is available on the first post of that thread.

I will update this top post as new methods are introduced into the discussion.
Last Updated this post: 27 January 2006

Technical Problem - BG1 NPCs and one installation to play all of BG1/SoA/ToB, and touching on _ prepending system
Several conditions arise:
- CREs shall be prepended with a '_' prefix
- For one installation to play all of BG1/SoA/ToB, ruleset files cannot be replaced, but rather appended (I refer to INTERDIA.2DA, PDIALOG.2DA, NPCLEVEL.2DA)
- BG1 NPC CRE DeathVars are the same as those in SoA/ToB for NPCs that appear in both (e.g. "Imoen" "Minsc" "Jaheira" "Edwin" "Viconia"; even C6SAFAN.CRE and C6CORAN.CRE may be touched by the inclusion of "Coran" "Safana" into NPCLEVEL.2DA, although this is currently mere speculation)

Hence:
- ruleset data for BG1 NPCs overlap and will affect them if they are found in SoA

Possible Solutions:
- use two installations instead, meaning SoA/ToB won't be playable unless a new installation is made (this is the current TuTu method, but I don't prefer this, and the transition would make the duplicate BG2 install obsolete anyway)
- use the same B****.DLG, ****(J/P).DLG for affected NPCs, and streamline NPC levels throughout both BG1/SoA/ToB (this is the current BGT-WeiDU method, but I don't prefer this either unless a transition is installed, so I wouldn't like this for the core component; some TuTu mod compatibility issues are also caused)
- prepend affected BG1 CRE DeathVars with '_' (this seems like the best option to me, but this is at the expense of increased compatibility modding later in the stage)

Opinions welcome.

[Borsook]

To show I'm not just a tutu fan, I'll opt against two install option. While it can solve some problems (less strange random compatibility screw ups) I believe a lot of us play bg on not such great machines, and saving ~1gb of disc space can matter. I'd opt for DeathVars with '_' it seems to me most "eleganet", mod compatibility problems that may arise should be easily delt with, and the B prefix method would also cause some...

[CamDawg]

I'm tired of the phrase BGT-Tutu Project, so it's hereby referred to as The Project That Will Supersede Tutu And Baldur's Gate Trilogy, or TPTWS22ABGT for short.

Issue: BG2 Mod Compatibility

In this context, BG2 mods refer to any mod that does not affect the content of the Baldur's Gate portion of TPTWS22ABGT. By definition there are no BG2 mods for Tutu, so this will be a BGT-centric discussion. Of the six possible scenarios, five are easily mitigated by the TPTWS22ABGT team with no action required of the third-party modder.

Scenario One: BG2 mod has no interaction with BGT or its contents.
The trivial and most common case; no action needed.

Scenario Two: BG2 mod interacts with all BGT contents via a C_E_R.
C_E_R, a staple of tweak packs, are designed to be able to change anything on the fly. As such, file names being changed will not affect these mods. No action needed.

Scenario Three: BG2 mod checks for files in BGT so it can change its own content accordingly.
Easily mitigated by including a 'dummy file' to satisfy the BGT check, assuming that the checked file is not already in TPTWS22ABGT. A better, long-term solution is for the third-party modder to update their mod, though it's not strictly necessary.

Scenario Four: BG2 mod checks for functionality in BGT and uses if present. Functionality is present in TPTWS22ABGT.
In this sense, "functionality" could refer to changes in IDS files or other non-trivial file checks. Same solution as scenario two in that we can provide a 'dummy file' so that checks return true.

Scenario Five: BG2 mod checks for functionality in BGT and uses if present. Functionality is not present in TPTWS22ABGT.
Given that BGT is optional, the BG2 mod should have functionality to cope with the scenario where BGT (and its functionality) are not present. Ergo, no action is needed.

Scenario Six: BG2 mod detects and uses files in BGT.
This is the least likely scenario, and also the only one that may require the intervention of a third-party modder. If the mod simply requires files, TPTWS22ABGT can include these files. If the BG2 mod needs the file to be the same as the BGT version and it's changed by TPTWS22ABGT, then the TPTWS22ABGT team will need to work with the third-party modder on non-trivial updates.

Conclusion: The possibility of anything save scenario six is an issue that can be handled by the TPTWS22ABGT internally with no intervention required by third-party modders. It's worth noting that scenario six is the least likely of the scenarios, and the specific condition that would require third-party action is even less probable. The impact on BG2 mods will be neglible in the BGT to TPTWS22ABGT migration.

Edited by CamDawg, 27 January 2006 - 05:42 AM.