25 replies to this topic

[Avenger_teambg]

Some points to clear

WTF is GemRB?
GemRB is an reimplementation of the Infinity Engine. As such, it makes use of the data files, but not the .exe (and dll's) of PST.
We don't redistribute the original data (as it would be a clear copyright infringement), for that we rely on installers which still require the buying of the original game.

Why would we need a fixpack, and why now?
BG2 isn't that much ahead of PST as being supported by us. In fact, they receive more or less the same level of attention.
A lot of bugs in PST come out when we try to make an engine that works with the dataset given.
Making workarounds is tolerable only to a point, and usually they don't 'fix' the game, only make it not crash.
When people want to play PST on Linux, Mac, BSD, Nokia palmtop, PS3 or whatever computer or computer like machine they put GemRB on, they want to
play it without bugs.

Why anyone bothered to ask?
Well, only GPL compatible things could be distributed automatically. The smoother the distribution, the more people who play PST.

Putting up mirrors of the PST fixpack?
No, as it was already mentioned, a mere mirror wouldn't do it. There need to be modifications, if nothing more, then cutting out parts where it looks for an .EXE.
The question is, do you want to help us to make PST available for even more people, or we are on our own.

While this is unrelated to the fixpack, i want to mention: GemRB is also useful for Windows users, PST is running less and less reliable on Windows based machines.
Sometimes to the point where running it under Wine on Linux is more reliable than running it on M$ Vista. So, a native implementation of the IE (and PST as a subset)
is a good thing, even for Windows users.

[Avenger_teambg]

No problem - I was never planning to; that's why I came here to ask you about it.

I am confused. Were you not "planning to include [my] mods as optional extras as part of the install"? That is essentially the same as hosting them elsewhere. If there is a substantive difference, please let me know, since it may change things.

Apologies for hassling you guys.

No worries, I don't think I ever posted my position on this publicly before, so additional research wouldn't have helped. Thanks for respecting my position on it.

Sounds like that's true. Is there anywhere I can get it?

I'm afraid not. One of the Two Big Reasons for my not wanting it hosted elsewhere is the specific desire not to have to maintain multiple versions, which would be inevitable when other hosting sites failed to update on a timely basis.

Qwinn

The essential difference is, that it would be pretty much a 'fork'. You are not obliged to support something you don't maintain.
The same would be about the V2 version of the fixpack. Eventually, we would add stuff to it we find ourselves.

NJW came here to ask for advice and support, not to receive the mishandling he got.
I hope the hostile tone was only because of misunderstanding and my notes cleared that up.
If there is still some issue, lets discuss it.

[Qwinn]

I fully see the value of GemRB. No need to convince me of your mod's value to Windows or any other users. That is not in question. I'm happy to help in keeping our mods compatible with one another.

If you would like us to explain the logic behind the engine fixes, so that you can fix those in GemRB as well, I'd be happy to help as far as I can. Up to Scient how much he'd want to participate in something like that.

And, in preparation for your actual release of GemRB once its ready, I'd be happy to produce a GemRB friendly version of my installer, one that would skip the engine fixes. (I can't think of anything else that should be required, but if there is, I'll be happy to help within reason.) And you can thus tell your players, after installing GemRB, go here and download Fixpack and other mods, they are GemRB friendly.

I personally believe that that is fully within the realm of what should be considered reasonable acceptable cooperation between modders. I do not believe that acceptable cooperation requires a modder to extend his blessing to another modder repackaging their unmodified work and distributing it independently. Therefore, the help I'm offering here is contingent upon you NOT attempting to package my version 2.0 (or any other) with your mod. My enthusiasm is also inversely proportional to how much crap I'm going to be given for my position. And if you are thinking "I bet I can get away with giving him a little crap cause I still feel entitled to redistribute his work", imagine my enthusiasm being divided by zero.

Qwinn

P.S. I'm sorry if njw felt I was hostile... I did not mean it to be (nor is -this- post meant to be hostile... "not hostile" doesn't mean "bending over", though). I thought we ended the discussion in PM on reasonable terms. If other posters were hostile, well, some of that same hostility was directed at me as well, so I hope I am not held responsible for it.

Edited by Qwinn, 31 May 2009 - 09:07 AM.

[fuzzie]

If you would like us to explain the logic behind the engine fixes, so that you can fix those in GemRB as well, I'd be happy to help as far as I can. Up to Scient how much he'd want to participate in something like that.

Thankyou for the offer, that might be helpful, although the EngineFixes.tph seems fairly well commented. It looks like the Morale system is the only complicated change, and since that seems to be new work by Scient (as opposed to bugfixes we'd end up writing in any case), I'm not sure whether he'd want us implementing that.

I think skipping the engine fixes for GemRB is also not necessary, since the .exe file is still going to be there in the game install, and changing it would be harmless.

Therefore, the help I'm offering here is contingent upon you NOT attempting to package my version 2.0 (or any other) with your mod.

I think the only possibility of packaging fixes with GemRB itself would be writing new "vital fixes" mini-fixpacks, fixing the show-stopper game-breaking bugs which we find independently. But I don't think this is necessary for PS:T.

Edited by fuzzie, 01 June 2009 - 02:38 AM.

[scient]

Well, once v4 is completed I wouldn't be against lending a hand to GemRB with knowledge I have of inner workings of PST. There is a LOT of code specific to TNO which is not part of IE. Most of it is just segments of existing IE code sometimes slightly modified. Still, to mirror PST you'd have to add these checks in. As for morale, getting it working shouldn't be too hard. I basically set up two types of morale. The first being the original which I like to call "current morale" (CM) and second being "max morale" (MM). Without any state changes, CM/MM are the same. CM is used in things that modify morale directly such as horror spell and combat damage. MM doesn't change except via script functions (incmorale, decmorale, etc) and used in the dialog checks among other places. I can provide some more detailed notes at some point if you're interested in mirroring it into PST branch of GemRB.

Edited by scient, 03 June 2009 - 05:37 PM.

[fuzzie]

Well, once v4 is completed I wouldn't be against lending a hand to GemRB with knowledge I have of inner workings of PST. There is a LOT of code specific to TNO which is not part of IE. Most of it is just segments of existing IE code sometimes slightly modified. Still, to mirror PST you'd have to add these checks in.

We'd all be very grateful for an help you could give, if you ever have any time left from patching *both* of my favourite games!

We have some small parts of TNO-specific code already (I know of the resurrection/death code and some level-up special-casing), but for the most part we haven't even begun to look into how it works. A lot of the existing levelup/stats/combat/etc code just assumes that the game rules work the same as the BG2 rules, so we might have a lot of work ahead of us just to make the non-TNO code work properly - I'm hoping to work on this sometime soon.

As for morale, getting it working shouldn't be too hard. I basically set up two types of morale. The first being the original which I like to call "current morale" (CM) and second being "max morale" (MM). Without any state changes, CM/MM are the same. CM is used in things that modify morale directly such as horror spell and combat damage. MM doesn't change except via script functions (incmorale, decmorale, etc) and used in the dialog checks among other places. I can provide some more detailed notes at some point if you're interested in mirroring it into PST branch of GemRB.

It sounds like it would be fairly easy for us to mirror into GemRB, at least.