Windows Installer for Xconq

Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

Hello,

  Due to popular demand, I have created an installer program to 
assist in setting up Xconq on Windows. This can be gotten at:
  http://eric_mcdonald.home.comcast.net/xconq

  It should be entirely self-contained, meaning that you should 
not need to go out and install any supporting things first. I will 
improve it further in the times ahead. Some of the features:
  (1) Can choose install path.
  (2) Creates a menu in the Programs menu group in the Start Menu.
  (3) Creates a Desktop icon for xconq.exe.
  (4) Has an uninstaller.
  (5) Can be uninstalled from Add/Remove Programs control panel.
  (6) Has shortcuts (in Start|Programs|Xconq) for HTML 
documentation.
  (7) xconq.exe is associated with .xcq files.
  Things that still need to be done:
  (1) Bind icons to the xconq and imfapp executables (which will 
also be reflected in the shortcuts).
  (2) Make xconq.exe run from any working directory. This will 
make feature #7 actually be useful. Once this is taken care of, 
you will be able to double-click on saved xconq games (.xcq files) 
and have them launch Xconq.
  TODO #1 should be quite easy. I will take care of it soon. TODO 
#2 might be easy, but I need to research it more.

  As always, feedback is welcome.

  Enjoy,
    Eric

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>Hello,
>
>  Due to popular demand, I have created an installer program to
>assist in setting up Xconq on Windows. This can be gotten at:
>  http://eric_mcdonald.home.comcast.net/xconq

This is great! Precisely what we needed. I tested it and it works fine even
on my somewhat unusal Windows setup. I saw only one minor glitch, and that
is that the icons are drawn using 4-bit graphics, even though 32 bits are
available. When I compile the icons into the exe file, the correct depth is
used, so this is not just a setup problem.

I just checked in the new document icons for Windows. So when you get
around to binding icons, you could bind those to the xcq extension.

Hans

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Hans Ronne wrote:

> This is great! Precisely what we needed.

Thanks. Glad you like it.

> on my somewhat unusal Windows setup. I saw only one minor glitch, and that
> is that the icons are drawn using 4-bit graphics,

Interesting. Which icons? The installer and uninstaller icons? 
Except for a misguided attempt to borrow an icon from Xconq.ico 
for the Xconq documents, I don't recall having any other icons.

> available. When I compile the icons into the exe file, the correct depth is
> used, so this is not just a setup problem.

Yes, this is my plan. I think that I will need to use windres, 
which is provided with Cygwin, to use the Xconq.RC file to make an 
obj file to link in.

> I just checked in the new document icons for Windows. So when you get
> around to binding icons, you could bind those to the xcq extension.

Will do. Thanks.

I also think it might be a good idea to toss up a GPL license 
screen at the beginning of the install process. I played with that 
yesterday but was experiencing some issues.

And I envision a user being able to choose between a "Minimal" 
(xconq.exe plus game library and support stuff), 
"Standard" (Minimal plus imfapp.exe), and "Full" install 
(Standard plus the sources). I have rudimentary support for 
this in the install script, but nothing that is visible yet. I 
suppose "Custom" could also become an option, __but, one thing at 
a time.

Eric

P.S. I will check in my NSIS (Nullsoft Scriptable Install System) 
script later this week. Nullsoft is the same company that makes 
Winamp, which is why the installer interface might seem familiar 
to some.

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Hans Ronne wrote:
>
>> This is great! Precisely what we needed.
>
>Thanks. Glad you like it.
>
>> on my somewhat unusal Windows setup. I saw only one minor glitch, and that
>> is that the icons are drawn using 4-bit graphics,
>
>Interesting. Which icons? The installer and uninstaller icons?
>Except for a misguided attempt to borrow an icon from Xconq.ico
>for the Xconq documents, I don't recall having any other icons.

The installer dumps two icon files (Xconq.ico and Imfapp.ico) into the top
xconq directory. I thought at first you were using shortcuts to the cygwin
apps, but they are just plain icons. And they are drawn with 4 bits even
though they contain 8-bit and 32-bit images. But so are my original 32-bit
icons as well (I just checked) so it is clearly not related to your
installer. Sorry about the confusion. Seems that XP prefers to use the
lowest depth available when it draws an .ico file, unlike a .exe file where
the best image is used :-/.

So if you are going to compile in the icons this will not matter the least.

Hans

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Jim Kingdon]

> And I envision a user being able to choose between a "Minimal"
> (xconq.exe plus game library and support stuff), "Standard" (Minimal
> plus imfapp.exe), and "Full" install (Standard plus the sources)

I guess that makes sense.  Imfapp is half a mebibyte on my linux
system, and full sources seem to be about 5 mebibytes or so.  Having
an option to install sources seems more useful than many programs, as
the xconq sources are kind of useful in understanding how the game
works until/unless we get more documentation volunteers than we have
now.

I'd call the options something like "Normal" (everything you need to
play xconq), "Designer" (includes files recommended for game
designers), and "Source" (includes xconq source code, for those
desiring maximum insight into xconq's functioning).

[OFFTOPIC?] Doc Chow (was Re: Windows Installer for Xconq)

[Eric McDonald]

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Jim Kingdon wrote:

> I guess that makes sense.  Imfapp is half a mebibyte on my linux
> system, and full sources seem to be about 5 mebibytes or so.  Having

I think I can get used to saying "mebibyte", but "kibibytes" 
really sounds like a brand of dog chow. Thankfully, a half a 
kibibyte (aka, binary kilobyte) is not known as a "kibble", in the 
way that half a byte is known as a "nibble". Otherwise, we would 
have all these Kibbles and Bits floating around.

> the xconq sources are kind of useful in understanding how the game
> works until/unless we get more documentation volunteers than we have
> now.

Yes. Absolutely agreed.

If my motivation capacitor ever becomes sufficiently recharged 
(wrt documentation), I intend to mention the formulae used by 
each of the combat models for determining hits and misses and 
damage. Another good thing that could be done, imo, is using 
@ifhtml in the .texi sources, so that newer texi2html translators 
can include raw HTML (useful for including screenshots in the 
HTML versions of the docs).

I still need to write up some things regarding compound terrain 
effects, but have been holding back because I think I should 
refine that code further to deal with my previously mentioned 
ideas about border and connector aux terains.

> I'd call the options something like "Normal" (everything you need to
> play xconq), "Designer" (includes files recommended for game
> designers), and "Source" (includes xconq source code, for those
> desiring maximum insight into xconq's functioning).

I'll consider what you suggest.

  It's a dog's world,
    Eric

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

Hello,

On Mon, 3 Nov 2003, Eric McDonald wrote:

>   Due to popular demand, I have created an installer program to 
> assist in setting up Xconq on Windows. This can be gotten at:
>   http://eric_mcdonald.home.comcast.net/xconq

>   Things that still need to be done:
>   (1) Bind icons to the xconq and imfapp executables (which will 
> also be reflected in the shortcuts).

This is now done. I also added a license screen to the installer 
and a components selector. There are now 3 install types 
available: Standard (for players), Premium (for game designers), 
and Everything (includes source code).

>   (2) Make xconq.exe run from any working directory. This will 
> make feature #7 actually be useful. Once this is taken care of, 
> you will be able to double-click on saved xconq games (.xcq files) 
> and have them launch Xconq.

This is going to require deeper surgery. I might not get to it 
until the weekend.

>   As always, feedback is welcome.
> 
>   Enjoy,
>     Eric

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>>   Things that still need to be done:
>>   (1) Bind icons to the xconq and imfapp executables (which will
>> also be reflected in the shortcuts).
>
>This is now done. I also added a license screen to the installer
>and a components selector. There are now 3 install types
>available: Standard (for players), Premium (for game designers),
>and Everything (includes source code).

That's nice. But "Premium" really sounds like some kind of commercial
service that people would have to pay for. Couldn't we have "Game Designer"
instead, as Jim suggested?

Hans

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003, Hans Ronne wrote:

> >available: Standard (for players), Premium (for game designers),
> >and Everything (includes source code).
> 
> That's nice. But "Premium" really sounds like some kind of commercial
> service that people would have to pay for. Couldn't we have "Game Designer"
> instead, as Jim suggested?

We could, but "Game Designer" makes it sound like that you are 
getting some kind of game designer, and not necessarily everything 
needed to play Xconq. How about "1-topping", "2-toppings", and 
"the works"? Or maybe that sounds too commercial (and a bit 
"cheesy").

Seriously, how about we just drop the fancy labels, and say "For 
Players", "For Game Designers", and "Everything"?

Eric

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>Seriously, how about we just drop the fancy labels, and say "For
>Players", "For Game Designers", and "Everything"?

Sounds fine to me. We could also use "For Hackers" as the last option. That
would follow Stan's layout of the manual, which comes in three parts:
Players Manual, Game Design Manual and Hacking Maunal.

Hans

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Brandon J. Van Every]

> We could, but "Game Designer" makes it sound like that you are
> getting some kind of game designer, and not necessarily everything
> needed to play Xconq.

Try "Modder."  That's standard industry terminology for tweaking game
files to effect rule changes.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>> We could, but "Game Designer" makes it sound like that you are
>> getting some kind of game designer, and not necessarily everything
>> needed to play Xconq.
>
>Try "Modder."  That's standard industry terminology for tweaking game
>files to effect rule changes.

True. But game design in xconq is something more than modding. It's not
just like writing Civ scenarios. There is much more flexibility because of
GDL. You are not tweaking a game but rather writing one of your own. So I
think the term design is appropriate.

Hans

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Brandon J. Van Every]

> >Try "Modder."  That's standard industry terminology for tweaking game
> >files to effect rule changes.
>
> True. But game design in xconq is something more than
> modding. It's not
> just like writing Civ scenarios. There is much more
> flexibility because of
> GDL. You are not tweaking a game but rather writing one of
> your own. So I
> think the term design is appropriate.

In standard industry terminonology, Modding encompasses writing game
scripts with game specific languages.  For instance, writing a bot in
Quake C.  If that's all you're doing, if you're not modifying source
code, then Modding is the canonically correct industry standard term.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Brandon J. Van Every]

> In standard industry terminonology, Modding encompasses writing game
> scripts with game specific languages.  For instance, writing a bot in
> Quake C.  If that's all you're doing, if you're not modifying source
> code, then Modding is the canonically correct industry standard term.

To amplify, the commercial game Counterstrike is nothing more than a Mod
of Half-Life.  And it has sold more than Half-Life.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>> In standard industry terminonology, Modding encompasses writing game
>> scripts with game specific languages.  For instance, writing a bot in
>> Quake C.  If that's all you're doing, if you're not modifying source
>> code, then Modding is the canonically correct industry standard term.
>
>To amplify, the commercial game Counterstrike is nothing more than a Mod
>of Half-Life.  And it has sold more than Half-Life.

Indeed. Because it is a modification of Half-Life. Which is what mod really
stands for.

The point I was trying to make is that an Xconq base module is not a
modification of anything. You write it from scratch using certain basic
objects (units, materials etc.) but how these objects interact is defined
by you (through GDL). You have a lot more freedom that in traditional
modding, where the rules of the mod are rather narrowly defined by how the
original game was designed.

To follow your example, the people who wrote Half-Life had no reason to put
stuff in their kernel that was of no use in their game. The xconq kernel,
OTOH, has been written to be as flexible as possible and to provide support
for as many different types of interactions as are conceivable.

Let me illustrate with an example that was discussed on this list last
year. If you do a mod of Civ II, you are limited by a number of constraints
on the number of unit types, how they interact, even what kind of messages
appear during the game. One of the best Civ II mods ever written (in my
opinion) was Harlan Thompson's Lord of the Rings scenario. However, when
you play it you will get silly messages like "Your Gandalf has run out of
fuel and crashed" because the Gandalf unit took the place of the bomber in
the original game.

Civ III is better in this respect because an effort was made to support
modding, but it does not come close to what you can do with Xconq. If
anything, I would call Xconq a game engine, or a game design tool, at least
when it comes to writing new base modules.

Hans

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Brandon J. Van Every]

Hans Ronne wrote:
>
> To follow your example, the people who wrote Half-Life had no
> reason to put
> stuff in their kernel that was of no use in their game. The
> xconq kernel,
> OTOH, has been written to be as flexible as possible and to
> provide support
> for as many different types of interactions as are conceivable.

I am not an Xconq developer, I haven't even gotten a proper Windows
build environment going yet.  So, take my opinions for whatever you
think they're worth.

My opinion is, even if you have the best game designer tools
imagineable, even if you can make really deep changes to Xconq gameplay
with them, "Modding" is still the industry standard term for it.  You'd
just tout the absolute coolness, flexibility, and scripting power of
your Modding tools.

Whatever the power of those tools, Xconq is not really middleware.  If
it were, a collection of rather different games would be running on "the
Xconq engine."  Maybe that sounds like a chicken-and-egg pronouncement,
but nothing is middleware until it's demonstrably in the middle of
something.  Middleware, for instance, would carry the connotation that
your code is very much intended to be used for non-Xconq games, that
development revolves around providing general purpose game engine
features.  I doubt that's the case, am I mistaken?

Regarding the label "Hacker" for the source code stuff, I think that is
both a confusing label and a very negative one.  Confusing because
Modders certainly hack at stuff, if not the source code.  Negative
because in many people's minds, it implies shoddy and undisciplined
engineering.  I don't think you want to communicate to the world at
large that your Xconq source code is a pile of sphaghetti coughed up by
hackers.  Even if hacking the sources is fun in the eyes of many people.

I would suggest the label "For Programmers" instead.

I think "For Players, For Modders, For Programmers" is standard game
industry terminology and creates the least amount of confusion, even if
you don't think it's a perfect fit.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

Taking risk where others will not.

RE: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Hans Ronne]

>Whatever the power of those tools, Xconq is not really middleware.  If
>it were, a collection of rather different games would be running on "the
>Xconq engine."  Maybe that sounds like a chicken-and-egg pronouncement,
>but nothing is middleware until it's demonstrably in the middle of
>something.  Middleware, for instance, would carry the connotation that
>your code is very much intended to be used for non-Xconq games, that
>development revolves around providing general purpose game engine
>features.  I doubt that's the case, am I mistaken?

I'm not arguing that Xconq is middleware either. But I think we may be
trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. There is nothing out there,
to my knowledge, that resembles Xconq in that what you call modding (and
the Xconq manual calls game design) is the primary purpose, rather than
something you do to modify an existing game. That's why I call it a game
design tool.

If your question is: has anybody who intended to write a completely new
game ended up using Xconq to implement it, the anwser is yes. Check out the
Castiron Life project:

http://castironlife.sourceforge.net

and its implementation as an Xconq game module:

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=868548&forum_id=198668

Also see the many posts by Elijah Meeks (the main CIL developer) earlier
this year on the Xconq list.

>Regarding the label "Hacker" for the source code stuff, I think that is
>both a confusing label and a very negative one.

Hacker certainly is a word with negative connotations for many people
today. The wording is Stan's, not mine. He even wrote a manual "Hacking
Xconq". But that was back in the days before Sobig.F :-/.

Hans

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

Hello,

  I put the new installer on my Xconq Web site. In case anyone 
cares at this stage of beating the dead horse, the labels are: For 
Players, For Game Designers, and Everything.
  Hans, I forgot to put a doc with the Everything bundle that 
mentions CVS access, as we discussed the other day. I will do that 
next time. Probably will be a simple duplicate of the one on the 
Xconq Web site (making sure that link URL's are absolute instead 
of relative, of course). I'll just make a shortcut to the doc 
that will show up in Start Menu | Programs | Xconq, where the 
other doc shortcuts currently reside.
  I still need to address the issue of an "All Users" vs. "Current 
User" install. Other than that, I think the installer is pretty 
much finished.

  Regards,
    Eric

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Bill Macon]

FYI, I posted a message on the forum at Wargamer about these recent 
developments.  So maybe a few more folks will learn about Xconq, try the 
Windows installer, and hopefully get interested.  Jim Cobb, one of the game 
reviewers at Wargamer, already indicated he will check it out so perhaps you 
guys can get some good press out of this.  ;)

I still need to download all the latest stuff and get back into it, which 
should be easy now with the Windows installer.  I've been waiting for 
everything to settle down and holding out for the 7.5 release, but it looks 
like things are close enough.  Other projects have been keeping me busy, but 
it's time to make time for Xconq, yes?

Bill



> >  Due to popular demand, I have created an installer program to
> >assist in setting up Xconq on Windows. This can be gotten at:
> >  http://eric_mcdonald.home.comcast.net/xconq
>
>This is great! Precisely what we needed. I tested it and it works fine even
>on my somewhat unusal Windows setup.

_________________________________________________________________
Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95.  
https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.)

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Jim Kingdon]

> Jim Cobb, one of the game reviewers at Wargamer, already indicated he
> will check it out so perhaps you guys can get some good press out of
> this.

Cool.  Even if the review isn't so great (perhaps "it has potential,
but needs a lot of work"?), getting xconq's name out there may attract
contributors.

> Other projects have been keeping me busy, but it's time to make time
> for Xconq, yes?

Well yes, of course.

Then again I suppose I'm biased.

Re: Windows Installer for Xconq

[Eric McDonald]

On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, Jim Kingdon wrote:

> > Jim Cobb, one of the game reviewers at Wargamer, already indicated he
> > will check it out so perhaps you guys can get some good press out of
> > this.
> 
> Cool.  Even if the review isn't so great (perhaps "it has potential,
> but needs a lot of work"?),

That sounds like the review that I would give it. That's also why 
I'm working on the project.

> getting xconq's name out there may attract
> contributors.

Let's hope so.

> > Other projects have been keeping me busy, but it's time to make time
> > for Xconq, yes?

Yes. ;-)