153 replies to this topic

[Almateria]

I feel like the easiest way to achieve that would be to make a program that pulls Big World required files and installs them to some sorta preestablished list... a Setup by any other name, yknow?

If only there was such a program

[subtledoctor]

Guys let go the zealotry please, it will not help this thread in any way.

Leonardo, thanks for the post. Quick questions if you can elaborate:

What is the problem between the qd_multi multiclass kit library and SCS? How do multiclass kits affect tactical encounters with NPCs who do not have multiclass kits?

I suppose, qd_multi adds various effects to the CLABxx01.2DA tables, which in turn use opcode 177 effects to apply abilities to kits. Can SCS not parse those 177 effects, or something?

[Mirandel]

Question from a neutral party: as of now changes in BWPv17 ruined installation for those who try to install EET with BWS. Workaround is quite cumbersome and not very simple for non-modders. https://forums.beamd...for-windows/p22

 

Can EE users hope, that  you - Leonardo Watson, would be so kind to consider them in regards of installation and somehow fix the problem? Or this is the question to EET team now?

[Ser Elryk]

Question from a neutral party: as of now changes in BWPv17 ruined installation for those who try to install EET with BWS. Workaround is quite cumbersome and not very simple for non-modders. https://forums.beamd...for-windows/p22

 

Can EE users hope, that  you - Leonardo Watson, would be so kind to consider them in regards of installation and somehow fix the problem? Or this is the question to EET team now?

 

Yes. This. Pleeease...

[Roxanne]

Question from a neutral party: as of now changes in BWPv17 ruined installation for those who try to install EET with BWS. Workaround is quite cumbersome and not very simple for non-modders. https://forums.beamd...for-windows/p22

 

Can EE users hope, that  you - Leonardo Watson, would be so kind to consider them in regards of installation and somehow fix the problem? Or this is the question to EET team now?

 

 

Question from a neutral party: as of now changes in BWPv17 ruined installation for those who try to install EET with BWS. Workaround is quite cumbersome and not very simple for non-modders. https://forums.beamd...for-windows/p22

 

Can EE users hope, that  you - Leonardo Watson, would be so kind to consider them in regards of installation and somehow fix the problem? Or this is the question to EET team now?

 

Yes. This. Pleeease...

The issue has to be considered a pure BWS problem, not a BWP issue.

 

BWP is a standalone development to support installs for the *original BG game version*, especially the quite complicated BGT. That is its scope. Nothing else. BWP has no obligation to support BWS.

 

BWS (until now) has supported old ganes including BGT as well as EE games + EET. For a number of reasons that are now way in the past, BWS makes use of some BWP components. While those were essential to support BGT installs, their ongoing use for EE games was just convenience (why do similar things twice?).

 

If BWS wants to continue support for BGT (why should it? BWP is there to do it), it needs to be upgraded to BWPv17. (See this as a hypothetical option, it would require Mr. Unknown to do some work in which maybe only user Nobody is interested in.)

If BWS wants to concentrate on EE installs in the future and leave BGT with BWP support, the BWS needs to replace some minor convenience functions it still uses from BWP with some own module and make itself independent from BWP.

 

BWPv17 needs only to be considered by BWS if support for BGT is still in scope in the future. The current problem is temporary only and mainly due to the recent SHS/G3 failure that made everybody miss the BWP update by a week.

 

Whatever way ahead is decided for BWS, it is their internal issue. The scope and contents of BWP is clearly defined in the pdf manual for that program.

 

Any discussion about this is absolutely superfluous and only puts fuel to the fire of the endless "old game vs, EE"

Edited by Roxanne, 02 October 2017 - 11:36 AM.

[Mirandel]

 Any discussion about this is absolutely superfluous and only puts fuel to the fire of the endless "old game vs, EE"

For an unbiased look it just clarifying misunderstanding about different installation tools. For example, I had no idea that BWP - is a separate tool allowing to install classic games.

So, am I understanding it right and it's possible for BWS to support only EE games (single or EET), while BWP will support classic (single or BGT), so this kind of mishap would never occur in the future and no one will ever step on anyone's toes? I'd say having two independent tools could end that war.

[The Imp]

So, am I understanding it right and it's possible for BWS to support only EE games (single or EET), while BWP will support classic (single or BGT), so this kind of mishap would never occur in the future and no one will ever step on anyone's toes? I'd say having two independent tools could end that war.

No. Why, cause the BWS has far more features than the BWP does... it's single package ease of use fluff, while the BWP is everything that's not that. As it required manual mod downloading, extracting archive files and stuff you definitely don't want to do, as you can't just extract the mod files to your game folder as they feature autoexcecuting archive file that screw up your entire game if you are not careful AND read the 300 page manual cover to cover with old and redundant text all over the thing.
You would know the above, if you had actually used the old BWP before the BWS came out.

And besides, the BWS features far more than just the BWP and BWS... PST, CA, IWD etc stuff ...

Edited by The Imp, 02 October 2017 - 12:30 PM.

[Roxanne]

 Any discussion about this is absolutely superfluous and only puts fuel to the fire of the endless "old game vs, EE"

For an unbiased look it just clarifying misunderstanding about different installation tools. For example, I had no idea that BWP - is a separate tool allowing to install classic games.

So, am I understanding it right and it's possible for BWS to support only EE games (single or EET), while BWP will support classic (single or BGT), so this kind of mishap would never occur in the future and no one will ever step on anyone's toes? I'd say having two independent tools could end that war.

It is far more complex, since BWS has additional functionalities and supports more games than BWP - but if we just focus on large modded Baldur's Gate installs, paricularly BGT and EET, than the current de facto status is this:

 

•  BWP

 - up-to-date support for BGT (and other classic version mod installs) with plans for further enhancements

 - no support for EET (or other EE installs) and no plans to ever do it

 

• BWS

- outdated support for BGT (and other classic version mod installs) with no visible activity to improve it. May already be unusable today.

- up-to-date support for EET (or other EE installs), possibility for a modernised tool to succeed current BWS

 

Those are current facts, even though there is a lot of wishful thinking that it be otherwise.

Edited by Roxanne, 03 October 2017 - 01:38 AM.

[Leonardo Watson]

@subtledoctor
Unfortunately I have already deleted prematurely my notes and files regarding this issue.

 

@The Imp

 

As it required manual mod downloading, extracting archive files and stuff you definitely don't want to do, as you can't just extract the mod files to your game folder as they feature autoexcecuting archive file that screw up your entire game if you are not careful.

That's a false information. Obviously you have not looked into the Installpack for a long time. In fact, you can rebuild a new clean game folder with all mods correctly extracted (without inconvenient workarounds as BWS does) ready to start a new installation only in a rush. However, BWP cannot download the mods (yet).

[The Imp]

That's a false information. Obviously you have not looked into the Installpack for a long time. In fact, you can rebuild a new clean game folder with all mods correctly extracted (without inconvenient workarounds as BWS does) ready to start a new installation only in a rush. However, BWP cannot download the mods (yet).

Sorry, but there is no such magic that can restore a game that was destroyed by an ALWAYS block if the mod maker wants to deploy such in a selfexctracting archive....

[subtledoctor]

@Leonardo okay no problem, thanks anyway. It appears that some of the parts of M&G and SoB that you saw raising g problems might actually be EE-only. Possibly. Hard to tell.

But in any event if the load order changes work, then that's fine.

[Leonardo Watson]

@The Imp

There is much more magic than you might imagine. As any magic it is invisible. You will only see the results. There is not any problem with extraction and installation.

[Miksip]

Hello. i have a few problems with BiG World Install v17.

When i choose option 1 to prepare a megamod installation then first it can't  find folder "Big World Downloads" even if it exists in the same directory, but when i enter "Big World Downloads" manually it recognises it then. The same happens with "Baldur's Gate" folder.

Next i try option 2 to install the megamod and now it doesn't recognise "Baldur's Gate" folder even if i enter full path to it.

After looking at BiG World Install.bat and changing SET BGI="..\Baldur's Gate" to SET BGI="%DPATH%\Baldur's Gate" it seems to work.

Please fix path recognition in future versions. Thank you.

[Leonardo Watson]

@Miksip

I have installed BWP countless times without any problems. I suppose you have either copied the Installpack outside the game folder or you have copied the  folders "Big World Downloads" and "Baldur's Gate" into the game folder. In order to  work properly the folders "Baldur's Gate", "BGII -SoA" and "Big World Downloads" need to be side by side in the same directory. The Installpack must be inside the "BGII -SoA" folder. Only under these premises the Installpack will work correctly but it will work like a charm.

[Miksip]

@Leonardo Watson

I did as you said and it worked, but then i renaimed folder "Baldur's Gate" to "Baldurs Gate" and tried to install the megamod.It didn't accept new path when i entered it manually.

It seems you have set very strict rule to where it should be and then you have a bug where users supossed to enter new path manually if "Baldur's Gate" is not in the same directory as "BGII -SoA".

Please include your mention that "In order to  work properly the folders "Baldur's Gate", "BGII -SoA" and "Big World Downloads" need to be side by side in the same directory" to Big World Project manual to make it easier understand how it is supossed to be and fix that problem where "BiG World Installpack" doesn't recognise new path for "Baldur's Gate".

As i said in my previous post - it recognises manually entered path with option 1 to prepare a megamod but not with option 2 to install the megamod.

[The Imp]

@Leonardo Watson

I did as you said and it worked, but then i renaimed folder "Baldur's Gate" to "Baldurs Gate" and tried to install the megamod.It didn't accept new path when i entered it manually.

Did you actually have the game in the directory it says it self to be at ? Aka when you renamed the game folder, did you also update the baldur.ini files content ([Alias]) to point to the game folder ? As that would be what the BWS would require. As the game doesn't work without that.

Edited by The Imp, 06 October 2017 - 10:09 AM.

[Miksip]

@The Imp

We talk about BWP and it works without that since "The BiG World Install.bat checks the installation of the main directory and corrects the paths in the baldur.ini".

I used BWS before but want to give BWP a try. Thanks for your good intentions anyway.

 

@Leonardo Watson

Imoen friendship listed in the manual as v3.2 but i found only v2.2.

Is it a misprint or should i keep looking?

[The Imp]

@The Imp

We talk about BWP and it works without that since "The BiG World Install.bat checks the installation of the main directory and corrects the paths in the baldur.ini".

Just read what that says, is your BG1 game in your BG2 directory ? If it is, it's in the wrong place and it it's not, then the statement is not true and so the baldur.ini doesn't get fixed in the BG1 directory !!!!!!!

This is because the BWP uses a mod that does the job for it.. or an older version of that. As that's the one the BWS uses.

Edited by The Imp, 06 October 2017 - 01:13 PM.

[Miksip]

@The Imp

Sorry, but it feels that we talk about different things.

[The Imp]

:face you wouldn't want to miss, but will:

Well, the main game directory is the BG2 directory... which the BWP checks, via the linked too. Then there's the BG1 directory, which you need for the BWP to install the BGT-weidu... which the BWP doesn't check the integrity of the path, with the tool... It does check if it's correctly configured for the BGT-'s install, whether or not it can find the needed files in the directory you give it.

Now, if you have the game in the default directory, with the ' in it, it's generally OK and the BWP can handle it... but if you MOVE that to the directory without the ' in it or just elsewhere, you also need to open up the baldur.ini file in the new game folder with Notepad, for example, and edit the [Alias] directories to actually have the game to even work ... the BWP won't accept the folder you give it, if it doesn't find the files, because it uses the [Alias] folders to check if the files are there for it to copy them over, for the BGT's install. I wrote a long time ago a FAQs for Megamod for this purpose .. among the other 100 questions I answered 10x times. And I had 10000 posts... in the old profile. So I know a little bit ...

Edited by The Imp, 06 October 2017 - 02:15 PM.