Meanwhile... back on the ranch...

Whatever the rate your stock install is not harmed. I maintain one myself and have re-named it to protect it from accidents to begin with. Whatever the installation method. You can protect your clean installation with a simple re-naming process which I described. (which you referred to as "nonsense"... direct quote) There are more work-arounds for the same available than that as well.

Potoroo, you are stating that a thing is difficult or cantankerous when it is not.

Sigh.

SHUT UP!!! JUST SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!:damn:

FFS!
3 simple solutions
a) do what everyone has suggested regarding multiple installs
b) Install someplace else and move it yourself
c) dont bother downloading it

Further update from the GWX dev team.

Every last one of us expects to be COMPLETELY bald by this time next year.

At some point though maybe at different times... we also expect to spend some time in nice foam-rubber romper-rooms following large doses of good-old Thorazine.

:|\\

That is if chain-smoking and heavy drinking doesn't kill us first...

Oh wait a minute... methinks our wives and girlfriends will shoot us first.

(maybe if we hide the bullets well enough... we can look forward to full baldness.)

:arrgh!:

Heck i'm already bald:stare:

Then you better duck. ... ummm FRYING PAN ALERT!!! ;)

@Kpt.Lehman

I think ur wive is going to do this to u.
http://www.onzin.com/view.php?id=1813

:rotfl:

:o :o :o That is not cool.

See you guys later... am off to work.

I cant speak for any1 else here, but every time I get a new game and after the first install of said new game (with any patches required) I copy the entire game an dump it into my Backups Drive. This now becomes my SAFE install that just sits there. It has no short cuts, can never be launched by accident and when ever I need an original file, I just copy an paste those files to my Temp Modding folder (which is an actual whole HDD of its own). So D:/ drive has my SH3 playing version, J:/ Drive has an original backup copy plus a backup copy of GW and GWX versions. K:/ Drive is the Temp Modding Drive with models / skins / ect ect under construction for all games that I mod.

Now, IF I was to say (heavan forbid) want a NYGM version as well, I'd simply delete whats inside my D:/ Drive SH3 folder (currently GWX) and copy paste back in the original files from my backup J:/ Drive. Install NYGM as per normal default and copy all the now NYGM version and paste that into a new folder in my Backups Drive. Then repeat the delete, copy my GWX version and paste back into D:/ Drive.

But since I dont play any other mod for SH3 I have no need to have different versions set up to be playable. And why should I, GWX is by far the most comprehensive mod for SH3. Has more bug fix's than any other mod, more content than any other mod, has by far the best campaign than any other mod and now has, I personaly feel, the most balanced historical feel to SH3. In fact I'd go so far as to say GW and GWX are almost unoffical patch's for SH3. That being the case why would I, if I was the average SH3 user, want to install GW/GWX to some other off the cuff directory when I really need it in my playable SH3 install!

GW1.1a has had over 200 000 D/L's - how many ppl are here at subsim, no where near that number and of that number how many are SH3 playes, even smaller again. So why would we make GWX suit a small noisy minority who by their very nature can mod SH3 and fix/sort any small personal dislikes to their version of GWX when we have a user base thats a silent majority that have no means or know how to get client support for their GWX install. It all boils down to 1 thing - Keep It Simple Stupid. the simpler and straight forward we keep the install of GWX the LESS chance ppl will have of it fúcking up. When we hope to surpass the 200 000 D/L's of GW1.1a with GWX, I think you would agree that your personal beef is pretty pathetic in the grand scheme of things and is a very wee small minor issue that has no real bearing on how we should release GWX.

PS: 200 000 D/L's is a conservitive number btw, IIRC the last time I checked the N° of D/L's it was close to 500 000. 1 person with a beef v's 200 000 to 400 000+ happy users, you do the maths!

Is it just me, or is this forum getting ruder by the minute?

Probably
Its not always intentional but some things are just so trivial in the whole picture of things it drives you to despair

Minor drama is all. Get yourself a bag of popcorn, pull up a seat and enjoy the show. :lol:
edit: i think Kapt should derail the drama and put up another teaser to drool over. :D

Nah, it´s just you. ;)

Anyways, to the topic.

Why it is so hard to make a fresh install of SHIII to the DEFAULT PATH, add GWX and then just copy&paste the install to where ever you want? I do that all the time and have had no problems with it.

Strawman. No-one has requested GWX be changed.


True. No-one is requesting the installation be made complex, merely that the user can change the installation path. Your average user with only one installation would simply accept the default offered and click Next.

Argumentum ad numerum fallacy.

If they're so happy with GW's installation procedure then why is the GWX team going to such lengths with GWX's installation procedure?

Someone should make a poll about this. :rotfl:

Edit: This reminds me about the Windshield wiper-gate at the RSC forums before GTR 2 came out. OMG.

Are you a NYGM fanboy, cause i have to ask, WTH are you smoking????

And since the average user is our MAIN user, your point being??

Yeah your only a small minor annoyance, deal with it.

We aint, thats the whole bases of your argument, talk about daft!!!!

It really seems pretty logical to me. They're making it idiot proof. Those who need to know how to do something else can just come to Subsim.com for all the answers to their problems :know: :ping:

as long as they know how to read. :lol:

Bingo!!! Give that man a cigar!!l

If you'd been keeping up you'd know full well my point is that the autoinstaller as described unnecessarily inconveniences some users whereas if it adhered to standard practices it would suit all users and still meet your aim of simplifying the installation procedure.

That's not what the project manager said.
It would indeed be daft so it's a good thing my refutation of your particular assertion is incidental to my argument.