Skip to content

Make the Override Folder Function Like NWN2's Override Folder.

Ugly_DuckUgly_Duck Member Posts: 182
in General Discussions NWN:EE
Where the game can read content from folders stashed INSIDE the Override Folder.

At the last stream they said to bring it up in discussion on the trello boards. So, let's discuss this.

I don't think it would be a difficult change to make & it would be a nice way to tidy up and organize our override folders.

Comments

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 22,725
    https://trello.com/c/nBQZC32I/170-improve-the-override-folder-function
  • SherincallSherincall Member Posts: 387
    Please don't take this the wrong way, but, why are you using the override? I agree with your suggestion, but I think it is much more important to apply it to hak and music folders.

    There should be no reason for players to use the override folder. It is useful for builders and artists to quickly test things without packaging them, but any data used by players should come in a hak. Here it was suggested previously, and I explained how it should be done properly instead:
    https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/959555#Comment_959555
  • voidofopinionvoidofopinion Member, Moderator Posts: 1,248
    I think "How it should be done properly" is not quite so applicable in the era of Steam Workshop.

    :(
  • SherincallSherincall Member Posts: 387
    voidofopinion said:

    I think "How it should be done properly" is not quite so applicable in the era of Steam Workshop.

    :(

    Hah, totally agreed. But on the other hand, manual override management (for the players) has no place in the steam version anyway; just subscribe to what you want.
  • StaranStaran Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 295
    edited March 2018
    Nwn2’s folder structure makes more sense.
  • jglvz256jglvz256 Member Posts: 52
    It's all very well saying players should use haks not overrides when virtually every player mod out there is provided in the form of an override. And using override for modifications IS the proper way of doing it - the hak format is for the purpose of containing addon content for modules.

  • Dark_AnsemDark_Ansem Member Posts: 992
    I second this for the toolset: allow the "open" toolset to recognise folders. In order to keep the "module" folder tydier.
    Of course, this could also be implemented in the game...
  • SherincallSherincall Member Posts: 387
    jglvz256 said:

    It's all very well saying players should use haks not overrides when virtually every player mod out there is provided in the form of an override. And using override for modifications IS the proper way of doing it - the hak format is for the purpose of containing addon content for modules.

    To put it bluntly, no. Overrides are for quick tests by the developers and for deploying server-side changes on servers that use no haks. Neither of which should interest a player.

    Again, bluntly, if any custom content author distributes their content using override, they are either lazy or ignorant. I guess "actively malicious" is also an option. Either way, they are doing it wrong, and if you see it, you should contact them and tell them as much.

    Content should always be packaged in haks when distributing. If haks are to be used with just a single module, assign them to the module. If it is content that is meant to enhance all modules (such as project Q, Facelift, etc), these haks should be preloaded by the game using the userpatch.ini.
    More details about this here:
    https://forums.beamdog.com/discussion/comment/959555#Comment_959555
    https://neverwintervault.org/project/nwn1/hakpak/neverwinter-nights-facelift-haks

    I apologize if this is coming through as too harsh, but encouraging the idea that override should be used for distribution is actively harmful to the community.

  • jglvz256jglvz256 Member Posts: 52
    Like I said, the vast majority of mods are in override format. The two mods you mentioned are about the only ones in existence that use haks. Are you saying 99% of modders are lazy/ignorant? It's only very recently (in Nwn terms) that the concept of using patch haks has been discovered (userpatch.ini is new to nwnee). I will keep on requesting override subfolders as being the most convenient way for the user to install and organize mods.
  • dTddTd Member Posts: 182
    Avoiding the whole hak vs override argument, I vote for having ee recognize directories like nwn2 does. If I choose to use overrides, and I might because it's my game and I want too, this makes it a ton easier to keep them organized :)
  • SherincallSherincall Member Posts: 387
    jglvz256 said:

    Are you saying 99% of modders are lazy/ignorant?

    Yes. I question the percentage though, as that would require 198 examples that use the override folder to offset the two above (and there's more than two). But I'll gladly accept 80%. The patch haks have been around for 10 years. Modders that left the scene before patch 1.69 get a free pass, everyone else should have known better.

    And to repeat, I agree with this request. I use the override folder and would love to be able to organize it. I'm only rebelling against distribution through overrides.

    One thing to consider, though: if you have multiple folders, you can have multiple copies of the same file. The game can only use one, and there's no clear way to specify which one takes priority. I wouldn't mind, so long as it is clear (e.g. lexicographical ordering).

  • Ugly_DuckUgly_Duck Member Posts: 182
    dTd said:

    Avoiding the whole hak vs override argument, I vote for having ee recognize directories like nwn2 does. If I choose to use overrides, and I might because it's my game and I want too, this makes it a ton easier to keep them organized :)

    I agree completely. This, in my unprofessional opinion, should be a quick & easy adjustment. Implement then move onto something else. But yes, I love the override folder - quick and easy for me & my lazy self.
  • ProphetSwordProphetSword Member Posts: 43
    Sherincall said:


    To put it bluntly, no. Overrides are for quick tests by the developers and for deploying server-side changes on servers that use no haks. Neither of which should interest a player.

    Actually, a great many players use Overrides to...well...override default content. If someone created a module in 2004, for example, that uses the default NWN skies and tilesets, there's no reason I can't install overrides that grant me higher quality skies and nicer tilesets to improve my experience.

    I don't think it should be a requirement for me to apply a hakpak to every module in order to utilize those updates. Using an override allows me to apply those changes to all modules across the board to improve my experience.

    Overrides, in general, are distributed to be used by players and there are a lot of them out there.
  • SherincallSherincall Member Posts: 387
    @ProphetSword please look at the links I posted. This idea that you need to attach haks to modules is what is propagating the whole problem with overrides. You can preload haks to apply them to all modules, just like overrides. This allows you to have unrelated content merge seamlessly, and allows you to control precedence in case there are conflicts.
    It already handles all the issues people are having with the override - you don't have to worry about which individual files belong to which mod, and don't have to worry about conflicts. You can add/remove mods quickly, with an edit to an ini file.

    There is literally no reason for players to use overrides. Preloading haks using userpatch.ini (nwnpatch.ini in 1.69) is in every way superior.
  • ProphetSwordProphetSword Member Posts: 43
    I understand what you're saying. But an important part of the equation is that there are a lot of overrides that already exist in the wild, and unless someone turns them into haks, using them as overrides is the only option.

    I will also point out that using overrides is easier, as it doesn't require anyone to alter any ini files.

    I mean, I get what you're saying, but the ideal of how it should be and the reality of how it has been for 16 years don't mesh. Whether overrides were meant to be used that way doesn't matter, the fact is that they have been used that way and there's a huge number of them that exist. Having an option to use folders within the override folder shouldn't be overlooked just because someone thinks that the Override folder shouldn't be used that way.
  • AlbeorisAlbeoris Member Posts: 1
    Be sure you will filter relative path like "/usr/bin", "%windir%", "..\..\..\", etc. and escape paths that can be interpreted as commands.
  • ZwerkulesZwerkules Member Posts: 112
    ProphetSword said:



    I mean, I get what you're saying, but the ideal of how it should be and the reality of how it has been for 16 years don't mesh.

    You can use an ox and a plough to work your fields because your ancestors have done it for thousands of years... or you could get a tractor.

    Just because something has been done a certain way for xxx years doesn't mean you should keep doing it that way if there are better alternatives.

    Have you any idea how many people report that the game is buggy when it isn't a bug at all that is causing their problems but an outdated 2da in their override folder that is overriding a newer game resource?

    I'm all for backwards compatibility and I know there are many overrides that work from the override folder and have never been turned into patch haks, but that doesn't mean people should be encouraged to use the override folder when it is such a bad practice.
  • ShadooowShadooow Member Posts: 402
    Sherincall said:

    jglvz256 said:

    Are you saying 99% of modders are lazy/ignorant?

    Yes. I question the percentage though, as that would require 198 examples that use the override folder to offset the two above (and there's more than two). But I'll gladly accept 80%. The patch haks have been around for 10 years. Modders that left the scene before patch 1.69 get a free pass, everyone else should have known better.

    And to repeat, I agree with this request. I use the override folder and would love to be able to organize it. I'm only rebelling against distribution through overrides.

    One thing to consider, though: if you have multiple folders, you can have multiple copies of the same file. The game can only use one, and there's no clear way to specify which one takes priority. I wouldn't mind, so long as it is clear (e.g. lexicographical ordering).

    I cannot agree with this. Patch-haks have been discovered just "recently" (at least in term of NWN history) and they were never documented properly. NWN wiki has no informations about them, the informations on patch haks were scattered on various forums which were shut down one by one. Players generally don't know what the patch hak, how to use it and there is almost no custom content on vault which would use patch haks. Everything is in override because at the time the content was created patch-haks weren't a thing. And despite I know about patch-hak and I am releasing stuff that can be used as override I still release it as override because majority players would be confused with patch-haks.

    Steam exists because some (new) players have hard time even install stuff like CEP, therefore asking them to edit ini file is not going to work.

    Also there is one major difference between overrides and patch-hak, that you might not realize.

    The resource priority is core data files/community patch < override < module < patch-hak < hak. This means that override is safer than patch-hak as it won't override scripts in module. Same package used as patch-hak will - while this can be wanted behavior it makes it much more likely to break module. An argument I hear very very often on these forums.

    Personally I do use patch-haks of course as they are really great way how to sort and order overriding packages. But I use this only for non-scripts.

    Therefore changing the override folder to work as nwn2 would be still beneficial and I will support this idea.
Sign In or Register to comment.

2024 Overhaul Games, a division of Beamdog. © 2024 Hasbro, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Baldur's Gate, Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, Wizards of the Coast and their logos are trademarks of Wizards of the Coast LLC in the U.S.A. and other countries, and are used with permission. Hasbro and its logo are trademarks of Hasbro, Inc. and are used with permission. © 1998 BioWare Corp. All Rights Reserved. BioWare, the BioWare Infinity Engine and the BioWare logo are trademarks of Bioware Corp. Black Isle Studios and the Black Isle Studios logo are trademarks of Interplay Entertainment Corp. Atari and the Atari logo are trademarks owned by Atari Interactive, Inc. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.