46 réponses à ce sujet

[kamal_]

Just now, I found this, and excel spreadsheet for importing, exporting, and merging 2da files:
http://nwvault.ign.c...r.Detail&id=997

I have not tried it yet.

[Dann-J]

Kaldor Silverwand wrote...

The issue I have with hak packs is that haks take precedence over contents in the override folder. So basically the hak author is ensuring that you cannot choose to do anything differently unless you unpack the hak, dissect it, and repack it. Hak packs interfere with freedom. Much better to have contents in the campaign folder. For authors who only wrote modules and used hak packs, then shame on them because they really should have used a campaign. This is NWN2, not NWN.

I strongly disagree with this. As a module author, I want to ensure that the customisations that I've built into my module (frequently via altered 2DAs) will work for the player as intended, and that other customisations that might unbalance my module, or introduce potentially game-breaking bugs, are not allowed to interfere.

If a module author wants to make their module compatible with certain custom content, then they can choose to use a compatible 2DA and add their own lines into it. That choice should be up to the module author though. For those who don't like the sort of module that author produces; either don't play it, or create your own modules.

Modifié par DannJ, 08 mars 2013 - 02:35 .

[ColorsFade]

DannJ wrote...


I strongly disagree with this. As a module author, I want to ensure that the customisations that I've built into my module (frequently via altered 2DAs) will work for the player as intended, and that other customisations that might unbalance my module, or introduce potentially game-breaking bugs, are not allowed to interfere.

If a module author wants to make their module compatible with certain custom content, then they can choose to use a compatible 2DA and add their own lines into it. That choice should be up to the module author though. For those who don't like the sort of module that author produces; either don't play it, or create your own modules.

Agreed 100%

[Artemis Absinthe]

kamal_ wrote...

Just now, I found this, and excel spreadsheet for importing, exporting, and merging 2da files:
http://nwvault.ign.c...r.Detail&id=997

I have not tried it yet.

this tool was made for NWN 2da. It should work, since NWN and NWN2 2das are pretty much the same, but I never tried it either.

The wiki page is quite exhaustive, and the spreadsheet seems easy enough to use. I think it doesn't need to be in the game directory, since NWN didn't have the My Documents\\Neverwinter Nights\\ folder. I think the desktop will be fine.

Modifié par Artemis Absinthe, 08 mars 2013 - 03:41 .

[Artemis Absinthe]

Iveforgotmypassword wrote...

Do you need microsoft excel or office to open it or something similar ? !

Yes, you can use Open Office.

Open Office is an office suite, fully compatible with MS Office, but it's distributed under the Creative Commons license (meaning it costs nothing, completely free) and it come with a spreadsheet editor like MS Excel. You can open MS Office files and save as MS Office, or with his native extensions (odt, ods, etc).

Modifié par Artemis Absinthe, 08 mars 2013 - 04:26 .

[PJ156]

Kaldor Silverwand wrote...

The issue I have with hak packs is that haks take precedence over contents in the override folder. So basically the hak author is ensuring that you cannot choose to do anything differently unless you unpack the hak, dissect it, and repack it. Hak packs interfere with freedom. Much better to have contents in the campaign folder. For authors who only wrote modules and used hak packs, then shame on them because they really should have used a campaign. This is NWN2, not NWN.

Regards

I concur, as others may have done I have only got this far in the thread.

For a very long time I shared Tsongo's frustrations much custom content is made hard to use by the way it is presented. Some even has less then useful comments attached which confuse a new user RWS did this in one of his. Confidence comes with experimentation and not everyone want to experiment.

I've just got to grips with 2da merging, I did it the hard way and made a huge mess of it but i did that so I could learn how it was done. Also because Kamals link shows all the placeable in your bluepring area if you ahve the hak or not, It makes it very hard to find the content you do have when there is so much clutter there.

The campaingn folder is the place for custom content IMO, its flexible and allows you to change things like conversations and 2das on the hop The only place for a hak is to combine the many haks you may use to give a campaign hak but that has its downsides. My hak folder is full of stuff which is duplicated taking up a considerable portion of my hard drive.

Now I shall read on

PJ

[PJ156]

DannJ wrote...

I strongly disagree with this. As a module author, I want to ensure that the customisations that I've built into my module (frequently via altered 2DAs) will work for the player as intended, and that other customisations that might unbalance my module, or introduce potentially game-breaking bugs, are not allowed to interfere.

If a module author wants to make their module compatible with certain custom content, then they can choose to use a compatible 2DA and add their own lines into it. That choice should be up to the module author though. For those who don't like the sort of module that author produces; either don't play it, or create your own modules.

How does using the campaign folder instead of the Hak change this Dann? People can always add content not haked via the overide so hair and clothing can be changed as long as you hak does not prescribe this.

Of course you wantyour content seen the way you intended, you put the hours is and that is your right, I feel the same. But from a technical perspective whats the difference between the Hak and the campaign folder for this. To overide your campaign content they wolod have to Hak the module. If they can do that there is a fair chance they could modify your hak if it meant that much to them.

I like to be able to change modules I have to say. Though my touch is always light. For instance I strongly dislike the setting on the npc clothing to be to never show armour so If I see that I go in and change it. I did this on Clys mods, for me it added to the experience.

PJ

[kamal_]

PJ156 wrote...

The campaingn folder is the place for custom content IMO, its flexible and allows you to change things like conversations and 2das on the hop The only place for a hak is to combine the many haks you may use to give a campaign hak but that has its downsides. My hak folder is full of stuff which is duplicated taking up a considerable portion of my hard drive.

Now I shall read on

PJ

If I put the content in my campaign folder it's duplicated by every mod with that content in it's campaign/hak, whereas if you use the haks the content is only on your hard drive once no matter how many campaigns use it. Same problem if you roll all the content into a campaign specific hak, Kamal's Adventure Super Funtime Alpha Turbo has the same 5 tilesets in it's hak as PJ156's Neverwinter Hero Remix Ultimate HD Edition 1.5, but since the haks have different names the content is duplicated.

This is why 2das should be seperate from content haks, something creators started doing at some point. While it's not a big problem with giant modern hard drives, it can be a problem for people with the game on SSD drives like myself.

Modifié par kamal_, 08 mars 2013 - 06:10 .

[Artemis Absinthe]

PJ156 wrote...

DannJ wrote...

I strongly disagree with this. As a module author, I want to ensure that the customisations that I've built into my module (frequently via altered 2DAs) will work for the player as intended, and that other customisations that might unbalance my module, or introduce potentially game-breaking bugs, are not allowed to interfere.

If a module author wants to make their module compatible with certain custom content, then they can choose to use a compatible 2DA and add their own lines into it. That choice should be up to the module author though. For those who don't like the sort of module that author produces; either don't play it, or create your own modules.

How does using the campaign folder instead of the Hak change this Dann? People can always add content not haked via the overide so hair and clothing can be changed as long as you hak does not prescribe this.

Of course you wantyour content seen the way you intended, you put the hours is and that is your right, I feel the same. But from a technical perspective whats the difference between the Hak and the campaign folder for this. To overide your campaign content they wolod have to Hak the module. If they can do that there is a fair chance they could modify your hak if it meant that much to them.

I like to be able to change modules I have to say. Though my touch is always light. For instance I strongly dislike the setting on the npc clothing to be to never show armour so If I see that I go in and change it. I did this on Clys mods, for me it added to the experience.

PJ

I think what he meant was having a module (or campaign) specific content instead of an override version. Kaldor's post started with "The issue I have with hak packs is that haks take precedence over contents in the override folder", so, I think that's when the misunderstanding began.

I don't agree with him, anyway.

Most people don't know how to use custom contents and just put stuff in the override folder like there's no tomorrow. If I'm writing a module, I want to be sure that everyone can play it without game breaking bugs or glitches. The Campaign folder is just easier to meddle with, while the hak, at least, ensure that you know what you're doing.

What users don't understand is that custom contents are not DLCs or add-ons. You can't just keep putting things in and hope for the best. As a modder I can do it, because I know how it works, I know the limits and I'm sure Kaldor do as well, but, as Tsongo said, in the first post, most people don't.

Someone once said that Misery Stone was so bugged it was impossible to play. I played it at least 10 times and everything ran smoothly. I'll bet money that was an override issue.

First time I tried Kaedrin's PrC (great respect for the man and his work) I couldn't finish the OC because the save was bugged. I had to remove it. A lot of people list Kaedrin's as a "must have", but it's so massive that making the module compatible is half the work.

Freedom is a double edged sword. I'm a software developer and one thing I know is that is better to have limitations than release a bugged product. If you can't do something now you can always try to do it later, but if something doesn't work you're just plain evil and you must burn in hell for the rest of eternity (semicit.). The problem is that even if the mod is perfect, there could be custom content that conflict and the user will blame the modder (or God/Buddha/Krishna), not himself.


I like to change things as well, but knowing how to do it gives me the right (and the means) to do it. Common users shouldn't be able to do it.

Modifié par Artemis Absinthe, 08 mars 2013 - 07:02 .

[Artemis Absinthe]

you should see some of the italian accounting forums... they're pretty badass

*deep voice* Come here, son, I'll teach you how to f**k the system

Modifié par Artemis Absinthe, 08 mars 2013 - 07:21 .

[Tchos]

PJ156 wrote...
How does using the campaign folder instead of the Hak change this Dann? People can always add content not haked via the overide so hair and clothing can be changed as long as you hak does not prescribe this.

Of course you wantyour content seen the way you intended, you put the hours is and that is your right, I feel the same. But from a technical perspective whats the difference between the Hak and the campaign folder for this. To overide your campaign content they wolod have to Hak the module. If they can do that there is a fair chance they could modify your hak if it meant that much to them.

I like to be able to change modules I have to say. Though my touch is always light. For instance I strongly dislike the setting on the npc clothing to be to never show armour so If I see that I go in and change it. I did this on Clys mods, for me it added to the experience.

For certain things, I agree with Dann, because I think he's talking about scripts.  If some override pack changes a default script that I needed to modify in my module, then my modifications will be missing, and something important in my module may be broken.  That would be a case where I as an author would want to override the override, for the sake of preventing problems, or else would have to tell the players to search through their overrides for certain files, or the shotgun approach of saying "clear the override".

Another possible case would be where I've modified a placeable which was not tintable before, to make it tintable, but if the player has another copy of that same placeable in override for some reason, then my placeables will not look correct.  A very minor breakage in that case, unless the quest is telling players to "look for the red one".

However, with everything else, I'm with PJ and Kaldor in terms of player freedom.  I want my modules to be as open as possible to the players to change in whatever way they wish to suit their preferences, and I encourage them to do that.

[PJ156]

Artemis Absinthe wrote...

you should see some of the italian accounting forums... they're pretty badass

 I think I know the ones you mean, the accumulated depreciation argument rages on but they are just so nice about it. Being Italian, I like to think they're hot too.

My whole next project, if it gets dragged out of the dusty cuboards of my mind in which it resides now, relies on using the campaign folder to live update aspects of the campaign to add content as I go along. That would be less convenient with a Hak; though I shall certainly have a hak to download for those who do not have the cc haks I will use already. 

I am likely to use Kamals link too though for my own ease (I have just been thinking about this while cooking the kids pasta) I will take the master 2daand remove the bits I don't want then add them back in as I add the new content. That way I avoid the clutter and can organise my blueprints as I go along. It should be simply creating two excel spreadsheets and maintining my modded one from the vanilla one.

The other hak debate I have with myself late into the evening is:

Do I use a big hak like pains monster pack or add monsters as I need to and develop a hak at the end. The risk of the former is I have a huge hak full of content the project does not use. That 400 meg download only uses 150 meg of data, the rest is guff as far as my mod is concerned.

I have still not reached a conclusion. I trust pain in that his content should be pain free to use (pun intended), butchering stuff myself just increases the risk of a screw up.

PJ

Modifié par PJ156, 08 mars 2013 - 07:39 .

[Tchos]

Also, PJ, that master 2DA file will not show all content in your blueprints whether you have the content or not, unless you install all of the blueprint files. If you only install the blueprints for packs you actually have (or delete the unneeded ones afterward), then the only phantom content is in the Appearance list, where it's reasonably out of the way.

[painofdungeoneternal]

lol nuts

It's not something you can make easy, some things require learning, without learning you are at a disadvantage. All we can do is offer to help, but you cannot do it for others, as then you'd never get your own projects done. Fishing poles are freely given, but the fish you are on your own to catch. Complaining also does not solve things, as no one is really in a position to change things, we must deal with the hand we've been dealt and make the best of it.

It is very hard to explain how to do things, most technical people cannot really understand the level needed by some users, how need more than just put this file into the hak folder, or they are not really thinking they need to explain how to make their module work with the nudie patch, kaedrins content, and what not. And when you do explain it, the users tend to just not listen ( even technically astute users tend to randomly refuse to install parts marked as required, or want justification for every single file which goes beyond providing a how to, and becomes designing their integration myself. )

I actually disagree with how Kaldor has used campaigns, and put his stuff in the way I believe it should be in the player folder, and not the application folder ( and also used his content and know it works that way ). His focus is on the official campaigns, so it's understandable how he is doing things, but it gets players into their application folder and touches official game content, can create conflicts which can affect other things and can't really be tested by him, and assumes everyone wants to use the game the way he does. There is far more than one perspective, you have SP focused folks, MP folks, players, authors, and generally each prefers one thing, and assumes it's fair to have it as a standard, but there is a lot more going on than any single group realizes, you have to really get a broader perspective. Campaigns are a tool, so are haks, they each have their place, but the answer to problems tends to depend on each problem created, and you can't just say one should be used instead of the other, really Kaldor using them is more of necessity of modding the Official content.

2da files are the source of many conflicts, usage of haks is recommended since they kind of self regulate content usage, either standard haks like PW's are using, thus preventing repeated downloads. These actually force the player to get the required hak files, campaigns just require the campaign folder be present. Grinning fool did a lot of work to fix how hak's work, to ensure they are dominant and work correctly. In comparison campaigns tend to be a lot more wonky overall.

So if I use spells.2da, and not just throw the 2da in there, it means I am doing something with it, like the MOW feature to allow a vampire to do vampiric abilities. If a player chooses to use content like kaedrins, well it causes a an issue with the vampire, unless kaedrin merges his content with the module. Generally kaedrin even asks end users to use specific event script names which can hook his events, but it's up to the module author to ensure his content works well with things like this. Generally don't use the 2da's used in class packs unless you really need them, or tell the players to install kaedrins content ( or use the hak version if it's actually required ). But hak's being dominant assures both module makers and players that there won't be bugs, and most players override folders are complete chaos unless they happen to know content management.

I believe just by putting the 2da in the module, would let it be overridden. Avoid using custom clothes that conflict with clothing haks, and prefer using 2da's in use by the community at large ( so if yours overrides theirs, yours actually supports similar things that theirs did. ) At the end of the day, you have to let your module be play tested, and provide fixes for issues reported by players, and work with others in the community to prevent problems - most authors do this - there is no other method for dealing with these issues.

I am working on a system to make things easy for the player, not the author. It basically lists modules and lets the player click play and have it download them using the program I am setting up. However it probably is not going to be seen as easy by those authors complaining in this thread, as it involves a new way of doing things, and despite it being easier, it will still require some effort and research to use properly - and I just don't have the patience to hand hold, so am aiming to do this entirely bypassing them. Most modules contents will be scraped from the vault, and a installation script will be calculated which can handle merging with whatever the player is doing, so that player can easily install it from the vault. It has to follow rules, has to be in the player folder ( same rules as the autodownloader follows ) unless it cannot work in that folder, and then it has to mitigate any conflicts ( mainly only exceptions are going to be DLL's for NWN2 extender and NWNx, a xml file for custom fonts ), and quite a few installs I am going to test, and I plan on making it so others can contribute fixes to the various issues as they occur. ( the installation scripts created will be public and I see this as an areas of collaboration eventually, and to a larger degree how to distribute new modules in the future ).

Of course a lot of the old issues which drove people to do things a certain way are moot issues, when you have tools that can adjust modules, adjust haks, and merge 2da's, and let that be merged by both player choices and module author requirements, it makes the reasons why things are done now a thing of the past. If something is uploaded to replace old content on the vault, ALL players using a module whose author is using this content, will get the new content, and if a module author fixes an issue, all his distributed files will be fixed as well. ( players might need to start over though, not gotten into saved games yet )

Modifié par painofdungeoneternal, 08 mars 2013 - 10:27 .

[Kaldor Silverwand]

painofdungeoneternal wrote...
(Kaldor)  assumes everyone wants to use the game the way he does.

I don't mind the rest of your wall of text but I have to respond to this mischaracterisation.  I am all about the freedom for people to play the game they want to.  If the game authors felt the way some of the posters in this thread do there would be no way to modify the game at all because that would "interfere" too much with balance.  My Makeovers are installed in the campaign folders in part so that anyone using them has exactly the same freedom they had without them installed. You can put whatever you want in the override folder and if it works then great. If not, then that's too bad. But it is entirely your call. Exactly the same degree of freedom provided by the OC and MotB.  I just can't guarantee that the Makeover OC and MotB will work properly regardless of your override content. But the Makeover certainly does not interfere with the things you choose to put in your override folder, unlike hak packs.

My goal was to give people more freedom in the OC and MotB, not to reduce it. And I absolutely succeeded. I did not dictate in any way that people play the game the way I wanted them to.  And if you look at the 2da files I include almost every option I provided can be customized.

So there.

Regards

[painofdungeoneternal]

You don't seem to want to modify how you do things, even though it goes against a feature built into 1.23 to allow usage of player folders. Hence it seems you prefer things your own way to me, as opposed to generally accepted best practices.

When suggested, you did not ask questions about if I had issues when i tested this, or seem willing to listen, but seemed to think what I am doing is outside what is determined by you a way people should use your content, and that it's entirely at my own risk. Frankly I feel like I am taking less risk my way, then your way, just because my application folder only has a few non standard files in it ( all related to NWNx and NWN2 client extender, and one xml file  ). Your content is segregated into a separate -home folder, so I can use it or not use it at my whim.

Note that the idea I had of moving things from the application folder, to the player folder, is based on conversations with Grinning Fool who did 1.23, who basically told me to ignore author instructions to the contrary. He intended 1.23 to fix the issue and make it so custom content is usable without having to resort to the application folder. There are very good reasons for which many players ( present party excluded ) entering the application folder are just asking for trouble.

Frankly many authors dispute if something works in the player folder or not, many get confused by other conflicts and it is easier to figure things out in the application folder, but there are very few things for which this is required. The risks outweigh the benefits to an extent, that it should really require a discussion which proves there is no other way ( generally the community can help show how this can be put into the player folder with no ill effects, even though it might mean some work on the authors part ).

Modifié par painofdungeoneternal, 09 mars 2013 - 12:47 .

[painofdungeoneternal]

The application folder is where your applications go, and where NWN2 is installed. The player folder is the folder in "my documents" named "Neverwinter Nights 2", and where your override folder is.

Should things be explained better, ideally yes, practically, it's just about impossible to get it worded so everyone understands. And most authors are not technical writers - the most qualified people are the ones who don't understand, who document what they are learning as they are learning it and write their own instructions. ( Some of them even don't use english as their first language )

If you don't like how it's written, figure out how to do it, and send the author revised text which is more clear. Often when doing this you start understanding why it was written how it was written. ( or do a video tutorial )

My tools are aimed at making it easy for the user, but further to make it harder to not follow instructions. The problem is not entirely the authors, the users want more explanation, but the authors actually want more reading of basic things like their descriptions, their readme's, and perhaps even a little google thrown in. The fail safe is the forums, but from my experience that is the first avenue users prefer - why read when you can have a conversation.

As such my goal is to eliminate the need for explanation, beyond downloading and extracting the program, I actually am eliminating issues via doing the work for the user, and the author.

I won't explain to authors, because they are not much better than users, and as such the only way to get things to work for them, is to also do all the work for them. Some of them will learn how I do things and learn how to modify it, but that is not required for most authors, and I don't think I am required to explain everything - especially when it's optional features for which there is no way to explain it simply, and I don't really want them perverting my instructions and then expecting me to explain it, better to just do it.

Perhaps it's a bad attitude, but then this is my hobby, and I am not here to provide technical support which can be done by reading and googling, and my focus is less on how people feel, and instead on the actual problems. ( and I think i've done quite a bit of technical support, at the expense of working on my own PW, on my own projects which are not completed, and I am focusing first on my problems instead of others )