9 réponses à ce sujet

[Proleric]

Did anyone find solutions to some of the odd behaviour in Builder-to-Builder reported a while back?

I haven't seen any issues when creating and loading on the same desktop, but sometimes there are problems when copying content to a different desktop.

We're seeing at least two separate issues:

• Creature template losing properties (female with Bioware head and clothing loads as default male in underwear). The heads and clothing are present on the target PC, as you'd expect.
• A file which was created from several custom resources (cutscene, area, creatures, placeable) appeared to contain only one resource - the cutscene - when opened on the target PC. However, on loading, the expected resources loaded, many unexpected core resources were reported as loaded, and some changes occured to the check in status of core resource which were not reported at all. 

[cachx]

I experiencied something similar. B2B Load seems to be bugged, In my case, everytime I loaded I got different results (creatures resetting to default, items resetting to default, incomplete scripts that didn't compile, etc.).



Lost a lot of resources and caused me to semi-abandon my little project =/

[Adaram]

There are definitely some strange nuances. What I am unable to tell, at this time, is if the B2B load is buggy, or, if it is a user error (ie. ME). I'll try and find some time to post specifics once I have some sort of repeatable process that yields a consistent success or failure condition.

[Proleric]

Thanks to Adaram, we found the bug in case #1.
The B2B Load only seems to work perfectly under the following conditions:
1. "Show Dependents" (which is not the default)
2. "Create New" for strings
3. No existing resources selected (default)

Some of the symptoms can include creatures changing gender, losing heads and inventory; plots losing all flags; and conversations losing all lines.

The problems seem to be worse if you try to load a resource into module A which has a dependency on an existing resource in module B.

I'll update the wiki.

Still looking at case #2 with Beerfish.

[Proleric]

Case #2 was fixed by following the same discipline.

When a B2B created by right-clicking on a cutscene is loaded, by default it appears to contain only that resource. However, using "Show Dependents" reveals that there are other new dependent resources in the file.

Those new resources (and only those new resources) need to be selected for load.

Otherwise, either the cutscene loads without the dependent resources and fails to work, or the new resources load with a lot of spurious activity around core resources, too (not sure why, but we've seen both behaviours with different cutscenes).

Problem solved, I think.

Modifié par Proleric1, 17 février 2010 - 04:04 .

[Adaram]

How do you determine "those resources" so that you can meet the condition "and only those resources"? I find that the list of dependent resources is usually long and sometimes it's hard to tell what to keep vs. not?

[Proleric]

You can tell from the penultimate column, which says Exists / New. It's normally the new ones you want.

Of course, if you know you're receiving replacement resources from another team member, it's OK to check those resources, too, but even then I'd only check the ones I positively wanted to replace.

I find it a lot easier when sorted on the owner module column.

Modifié par Proleric1, 17 février 2010 - 04:54 .

[Beerfish]

A real key it seems to me is to always select 'create new string ids' unless the person is 100% sure they have an assigned range that will not bollox up the module. As a matter of fact this should be a default if it isn't already.

[Proleric]

Beerfish wrote...

A real key it seems to me is to always select 'create new string ids' unless the person is 100% sure they have an assigned range that will not bollox up the module. As a matter of fact this should be a default if it isn't already.

Agreed.

It would be good to confirm exactly when it's essential to use the existing string id range.

One consideration is that the string id is part of the file name for VO and FaceFX. A team could decide that those files will always be generated from the central master copy of the module. That wouldn't be too difficult, as VO tends to be done late in the production process.

Are there any other reasons for using an existing range?

[Lady Olivia]

Well, I don't have much experience loading B2Bs, but speaking for those of us who prefer modifying the Single Player resources, I can tell you that assigning new string IDs is not an option when working on vanilla dialog: not only would it mess up the new VOs if any, it would require renaming and reassigning all the vanilla VOs, and these come in thousands.