Upvote Upvoted 33 Downvote Downvoted
1 2
Feedback from people who don't use mastercomfig
posted in Customization
1
#1
0 Frags +

Hi! I'm committed to making mastercomfig the best possible config, and that includes making the config more appealing to those who have decided not to use it or continue using it. If there's any aspect of mastercomfig that you feel could be changed or improved that is making you currently not use it, please let me know! I'd love to address it and make the config better for the TF2 community.

If you're reading this and are a mastercomfig user, but are annoyed by something, feel like you need to change a mastercomfig default as soon as you install the config, or really anything else, I'd love to hear from you too!

Thanks all!

Hi! I'm committed to making mastercomfig the best possible config, and that includes making the config more appealing to those who have decided not to use it or continue using it. If there's any aspect of mastercomfig that you feel could be changed or improved that is making you currently not use it, please let me know! I'd love to address it and make the config better for the TF2 community.

If you're reading this and are a mastercomfig user, but are annoyed by something, feel like you need to change a mastercomfig default as soon as you install the config, or really anything else, I'd love to hear from you too!

Thanks all!
2
#2
18 Frags +

I don't have any real problems with the config itself (been using it for a year or so) but from personal experience, whenever I would link people the docs on how to install mastercomfig, they would often feel overwhelmed and give up on even trying it. The documentation is great but lots of players are already using a pre-existing config (be it comanglia's, chris' or whatever) and it's a switch in mindset for them to use .vpk's instead of a more traditional config which they are more used to. I actually prefer the way the config is set up compared to something like comanglia's because of the modules system, but maybe it'd be an idea to have a segment in the docs on how to transition from a pre-existing config.

I don't have any real problems with the config itself (been using it for a year or so) but from personal experience, whenever I would link people the docs on how to install mastercomfig, they would often feel overwhelmed and give up on even trying it. The documentation is great but lots of players are already using a pre-existing config (be it comanglia's, chris' or whatever) and it's a switch in mindset for them to use .vpk's instead of a more traditional config which they are more used to. I actually prefer the way the config is set up compared to something like comanglia's because of the modules system, but maybe it'd be an idea to have a segment in the docs on how to transition from a pre-existing config.
3
#3
27 Frags +

99.9999999% of people I tell to use it are like ‘eh I can’t be bothered to install it’. Lower the entry barrier

99.9999999% of people I tell to use it are like ‘eh I can’t be bothered to install it’. Lower the entry barrier
4
#4
30 Frags +

make a text file version that i can just copy paste into my autoexec

i dont want to install a vpk thats hard to remove or modify

make a text file version that i can just copy paste into my autoexec

i dont want to install a vpk thats hard to remove or modify
5
#5
17 Frags +
YeeHaw99.9999999% of people I tell to use it are like ‘eh I can’t be bothered to install it’. Lower the entry barrier

I heard from some people that having to rename their class configs is too much of a hassle (to scout_c.cfg from scout.cfg)

Personally I never knew why you had to do this in the first place.

[quote=YeeHaw]99.9999999% of people I tell to use it are like ‘eh I can’t be bothered to install it’. Lower the entry barrier[/quote]
I heard from some people that having to rename their class configs is too much of a hassle (to scout_c.cfg from scout.cfg)

Personally I never knew why you had to do this in the first place.
6
#6
8 Frags +

Breaks my class execs so i just stuck with comanglias

Breaks my class execs so i just stuck with comanglias
7
#7
28 Frags +

I liked the older text file versions more because you explained all the commands and what the values do so I could just choose to tweak it however I saw fit

I liked the older text file versions more because you explained all the commands and what the values do so I could just choose to tweak it however I saw fit
8
#8
5 Frags +

You should try to update the program you had, it was so easy to understand and to edit things faster, i really like how fast and easy to change liltle things in the config, like sometimes i'd like to change something simple like texture quality, instead of going into the right paste and file to change the modules and stuff, i would open the program and just change it because the ui is in my opinion much more easy, especialy for someone who probably doesnt want to bother knowing how to install it i think would be better.

You should try to update the program you had, it was so easy to understand and to edit things faster, i really like how fast and easy to change liltle things in the config, like sometimes i'd like to change something simple like texture quality, instead of going into the right paste and file to change the modules and stuff, i would open the program and just change it because the ui is in my opinion much more easy, especialy for someone who probably doesnt want to bother knowing how to install it i think would be better.
9
#9
17 Frags +

i really dislike the module things and the fact that it breaks already existing class configs
if i want to change a graphical setting i don't wanna have to look for it in an alias with 5 other commands and it's already a bit confusing as it is trying to change commands in the config, i also dislike that there's like 7 different cfgs i am scared of touching them they're overwhelming

i really dislike the module things and the fact that it breaks already existing class configs
if i want to change a graphical setting i don't wanna have to look for it in an alias with 5 other commands and it's already a bit confusing as it is trying to change commands in the config, i also dislike that there's like 7 different cfgs i am scared of touching them they're overwhelming
10
#10
13 Frags +

Ok, thank you for the responses so far. All very good and useful feedback, but I want to start a conversation for some of these topics so we can get the best result possible. So, just to share some of my views with you all to show you what problems I was solving with each aspect of mastercomfig, just so you can maybe think of another solution or compromise, or at least become more sympathetic to what I'm trying to do. This isn't me trying to convince you or change your mind, only to share with you my perspective so that we can better communicate the way forward to solve these issues you guys brought up so far.

mastercomfig updates very frequently. It can be hard to keep up if the update process is anything other than drag and replaces the VPKs in your custom folder because you have to redo your changes every time you update. I thought it would be a worthwhile compromise to have an initial long context switch to VPKs from cfgs and a very low barrier to updating so that people wouldn't be inclined to stay on a super old version of mastercomfig. Additionally, mastercomfig is not just an autoexec config. It has lots of other modifications within TF2's script files which can only be loaded in the custom folder. For example, I unlock usually hidden/protected commands for disabling sound DSP, disabling ropes completely, decreasing water splash particles, and more, as well as adjusting what content is preloaded to have memory be used better. Finally, lots of people would complain that they didn't know how to switch between presets easily or remove the config back when it was text files, and now it's a simple VPK removal process. But even with all of that, I have actually started to release ZIP packages of the config, you can find them in the advanced downloads section, for those who don't mind what I think is a headache, and they include comments.

Now, about comments... Comments are all still there, on the GitHub page as well as in the ZIP package. They're only removed from the VPK since there's no reason to open up the VPK, and to save space. Comments were doubling or tripling the size of the VPKs and given that most people aren't even going to open them and there isn't a reason to just to check comments, they're stripped out there.

mastercomfig uses class configs due to a bug or feature in the Source Engine which does not execute game.cfg on map joins in multiplayer clients. Maps have some entities in them sometimes which set values of console commands which mastercomfig sets: detail prop distance values, and water distance values. The class configs are meant to be a workaround to set these settings to get more FPS by setting them to the config values after the map sets them. Additionally, they do some memory cleanup commands so that the game doesn't get bloated over time on long running games. I've tried making this process easier, by making it so you only need to create a user folder where your class configs are and then drag them all in there, instead of making it renamed.

mastercomfig has a modules system which is completely optional, you can use the autoexec in a user folder to use individual commands. With VPKs, the values in the config are static. Modules are used so people can get around having to set a command to a different value from the config, which may cause a system reload and thus longer startup times. Modules are able to replace what the config runs, so that you only run the command once.

Thank you for reading :) I hope to see your thoughts soon on how we can address some of these things in a way that makes everyone happy.

Ok, thank you for the responses so far. All very good and useful feedback, but I want to start a conversation for some of these topics so we can get the best result possible. So, just to share some of my views with you all to show you what problems I was solving with each aspect of mastercomfig, just so you can maybe think of another solution or compromise, or at least become more sympathetic to what I'm trying to do. This isn't me trying to convince you or change your mind, only to share with you my perspective so that we can better communicate the way forward to solve these issues you guys brought up so far.

mastercomfig updates very frequently. It can be hard to keep up if the update process is anything other than drag and replaces the VPKs in your custom folder because you have to redo your changes every time you update. I thought it would be a worthwhile compromise to have an initial long context switch to VPKs from cfgs and a very low barrier to updating so that people wouldn't be inclined to stay on a super old version of mastercomfig. Additionally, mastercomfig is not just an autoexec config. It has lots of other modifications within TF2's script files which can only be loaded in the custom folder. For example, I unlock usually hidden/protected commands for disabling sound DSP, disabling ropes completely, decreasing water splash particles, and more, as well as adjusting what content is preloaded to have memory be used better. Finally, lots of people would complain that they didn't know how to switch between presets easily or remove the config back when it was text files, and now it's a simple VPK removal process. But even with all of that, I have actually started to release ZIP packages of the config, you can find them in the advanced downloads section, for those who don't mind what I think is a headache, and they include comments.

Now, about comments... Comments are all still there, on the GitHub page as well as in the ZIP package. They're only removed from the VPK since there's no reason to open up the VPK, and to save space. Comments were doubling or tripling the size of the VPKs and given that most people aren't even going to open them and there isn't a reason to just to check comments, they're stripped out there.

mastercomfig uses class configs due to a bug or feature in the Source Engine which does not execute game.cfg on map joins in multiplayer clients. Maps have some entities in them sometimes which set values of console commands which mastercomfig sets: detail prop distance values, and water distance values. The class configs are meant to be a workaround to set these settings to get more FPS by setting them to the config values after the map sets them. Additionally, they do some memory cleanup commands so that the game doesn't get bloated over time on long running games. I've tried making this process easier, by making it so you only need to create a user folder where your class configs are and then drag them all in there, instead of making it renamed.

mastercomfig has a modules system which is completely optional, you can use the autoexec in a user folder to use individual commands. With VPKs, the values in the config are static. Modules are used so people can get around having to set a command to a different value from the config, which may cause a system reload and thus longer startup times. Modules are able to replace what the config runs, so that you only run the command once.

Thank you for reading :) I hope to see your thoughts soon on how we can address some of these things in a way that makes everyone happy.
11
#11
-2 Frags +

really weird net settings

really weird net settings
12
#12
5 Frags +
edinreally weird net settings

Could you elaborate on how you determined the net settings were weird? I'd love to address specific problems you encountered with hitreg or any other networking issue. Is it a specific value or behavior that is messing it up for you?

[quote=edin]really weird net settings[/quote]
Could you elaborate on how you determined the net settings were weird? I'd love to address specific problems you encountered with hitreg or any other networking issue. Is it a specific value or behavior that is messing it up for you?
13
#13
10 Frags +

i've used it for a while but the one thing about it is that being in a vpk it's harder to tweak if you don't want to deal with the decompiled version

i've used it for a while but the one thing about it is that being in a vpk it's harder to tweak if you don't want to deal with the decompiled version
14
#14
5 Frags +

Recently tried to install this myself. I installed using the instructions provided on the site, and it didn't seem to work for me. I followed the instructions of removing my current configs/verify game cache, launching the game with the suggested launch options (then removing them), and dragging in the vpk file into the custom folder. Maybe i'm misunderstanding but it seems like that all i need to do? which didn't seem to alter any video settings for me.

From the perspective of someone who lacks knowledge on these kind of things, i felt the instructions were a little confusing and a bit overwhelming.

Recently tried to install this myself. I installed using the instructions provided on the site, and it didn't seem to work for me. I followed the instructions of removing my current configs/verify game cache, launching the game with the suggested launch options (then removing them), and dragging in the vpk file into the custom folder. Maybe i'm misunderstanding but it seems like that all i need to do? which didn't seem to alter any video settings for me.

From the perspective of someone who lacks knowledge on these kind of things, i felt the instructions were a little confusing and a bit overwhelming.
15
#15
6 Frags +

And to describe how I understand the responses so far, essentially these are the following problems:

* Installation instructions are too verbose, overwhelming, have too many steps and have a lot of text with no examples, easy to follow guides or actual steps. Instead, they read more like descriptions of the process rather than the actual process. The steps themselves are still too overwhelming even if there were clear instructions.
* It isn't clear where to go for support or help with issues.
* The config does things or requires things that have no explanation as to why that happens.
* The VPK can be very hard to figure out and is very different from how people are used to using configs. There are many advantages to text files, and those things are hard to let go of.
* Previous config setups are hard to move/confusing to move over.
* Some settings are unconventional, not explained and hard to understand what the meaning or purpose of specific settings are.

And to describe how I understand the responses so far, essentially these are the following problems:

* Installation instructions are too verbose, overwhelming, have too many steps and have a lot of text with no examples, easy to follow guides or actual steps. Instead, they read more like descriptions of the process rather than the actual process. The steps themselves are still too overwhelming even if there were clear instructions.
* It isn't clear where to go for support or help with issues.
* The config does things or requires things that have no explanation as to why that happens.
* The VPK can be very hard to figure out and is very different from how people are used to using configs. There are many advantages to text files, and those things are hard to let go of.
* Previous config setups are hard to move/confusing to move over.
* Some settings are unconventional, not explained and hard to understand what the meaning or purpose of specific settings are.
16
#16
13 Frags +

People don't want to read instruction manuals, this isn't unique to your config. You could update the app to find pre-existing class configs and place them in the correct place. Maybe automate the clean-up?

People don't want to read instruction manuals, this isn't unique to your config. You could update the app to find pre-existing class configs and place them in the correct place. Maybe automate the clean-up?
17
#17
8 Frags +

This is coming from someone that actively uses and loves most features of mastercomfig so keep that in mind, however the two most clunky things about it in my opinion are transitioning to it and updating it.

I understand that the transitioning part has been made very easy by just moving files from /cfg to /cfg/user but I've had supposedly tech literate people struggle with this because they don't want to read a documentation, they want discoverability through use. I feel an installer of some sort would help this issue.

Having multiple VPKs is the biggest downside for me, it makes updating very clunky. I think this could be fixed by having one VPK containing everything and one configuration file similar to modules.cfg, maybe named something less scary and more intuitive like mastercomfig-settings.cfg, although I understand this comes with drawbacks.

With discoverability in mind, additional aliases for self describing cfg file names with a ready made cfg folder I think could help stop documentationphobic people from having difficulties. By this I mean you could have an alternative cfg for autoexec.cfg called something like run_on_game_launch.cfg, an alternative for game_overrides_once called run_on_server_join.cfg and so forth.

This is coming from someone that actively uses and loves most features of mastercomfig so keep that in mind, however the two most clunky things about it in my opinion are transitioning to it and updating it.

I understand that the transitioning part has been made very easy by just moving files from /cfg to /cfg/user but I've had supposedly tech literate people struggle with this because they don't want to read a documentation, they want discoverability through use. I feel an installer of some sort would help this issue.

Having multiple VPKs is the biggest downside for me, it makes updating very clunky. I think this could be fixed by having one VPK containing everything and one configuration file similar to modules.cfg, maybe named something less scary and more intuitive like mastercomfig-settings.cfg, although I understand this comes with drawbacks.

With discoverability in mind, additional aliases for self describing cfg file names with a ready made cfg folder I think could help stop documentationphobic people from having difficulties. By this I mean you could have an alternative cfg for autoexec.cfg called something like run_on_game_launch.cfg, an alternative for game_overrides_once called run_on_server_join.cfg and so forth.
18
#18
11 Frags +

.

.
19
#19
4 Frags +

Maybe updating the installer would be a good idea? People seem to like being able to customize their stuff from an app instead of having to go into notepad. Also, if I have my desktop resolution set to 1080p and my game on 1080p, my game alt tabs instantly with mastercomfig, but when I'm on 720p on my desktop and 720p in-game, it does take a few seconds to alt tab.

Maybe updating the installer would be a good idea? People seem to like being able to customize their stuff from an app instead of having to go into notepad. Also, if I have my desktop resolution set to 1080p and my game on 1080p, my game alt tabs instantly with mastercomfig, but when I'm on 720p on my desktop and 720p in-game, it does take a few seconds to alt tab.
20
#20
6 Frags +

Hey, another mastercomfig user here. Your configs let me play on some shit gaming laptop and I was super happy because that let me use 120 Hz with stable 120 fps on a laptop with i7-6700HQ and GTX 960M (yes, this is amazing).

Without GCFScape you can't watch what's inside the .vpk files afaik and that makes it complicated.

scrambledThis is coming from someone that actively uses and loves most features of mastercomfig so keep that in mind, however the two most clunky things about it in my opinion are transitioning to it and updating it.

I understand that the transitioning part has been made very easy by just moving files from /cfg to /cfg/user but I've had supposedly tech literate people struggle with this because they don't want to read a documentation, they want discoverability through use. I feel an installer of some sort would help this issue.

This is a huge point. Do you know why people still use comanglia's configs? Because it's simpler to copy some sort of text to autoexec.cfg and not to change your class config names to class_c.cfg. Last week someone proposed me a Mann Co, Key for help with setting it up which makes me think people think it's really complicated to use VPKs no matter how easy it is.

Pleeeeease, try to make base configs (ultra/high/medium etc) + all modules as a single text files and let it work with class files without _c extension in the filename.
In this way it's very transparent - you just see what do you set up. Give some title before every config with date and version so people could check what version of your config do they have so they could be able to check if their local version is outdated compared to the latest version on your site.

You can do it in this way: let people check what do they want on your site (let's say I want high config + no footsteps + flat mouse + no pyroland + no soundscapes), I click download and then your server concatenate that high config with all modules I chose to a single autoexec.cfg file which I just place in my <tf2-folder>/tf/cfg folder, I set up start parameters and I'm happy do use setup I wanted.

This would allow for some more flexibility, because let's say I want to have high quality models because I like how AWP looks like in game so I want to get a better look on it. It's only one cvar which doesn't do much. I can look for a config and change it easily.

Anyway, you're doing excellent job with these configs, really.

Hey, another mastercomfig user here. Your configs let me play on some shit gaming laptop and I was super happy because that let me use 120 Hz with stable 120 fps on a laptop with i7-6700HQ and GTX 960M (yes, this is amazing).

Without GCFScape you can't watch what's inside the .vpk files afaik and that makes it complicated.

[quote=scrambled]This is coming from someone that actively uses and loves most features of mastercomfig so keep that in mind, however the two most clunky things about it in my opinion are transitioning to it and updating it.

I understand that the transitioning part has been made very easy by just moving files from /cfg to /cfg/user but I've had supposedly tech literate people struggle with this because they don't want to read a documentation, they want discoverability through use. I feel an installer of some sort would help this issue.
[/quote]

This is a [b]huge[/b] point. Do you know why people still use comanglia's configs? Because it's simpler to copy some sort of text to autoexec.cfg and not to change your class config names to class_c.cfg. Last week someone proposed me a Mann Co, Key for help with setting it up which makes me think people think it's really complicated to use VPKs no matter how easy it is.

Pleeeeease, try to make base configs (ultra/high/medium etc) + all modules as a single text files and let it work with class files without _c extension in the filename.
In this way it's very transparent - you just see what do you set up. Give some title before every config with date and version so people could check what version of your config do they have so they could be able to check if their local version is outdated compared to the latest version on your site.

You can do it in this way: let people check what do they want on your site (let's say I want high config + no footsteps + flat mouse + no pyroland + no soundscapes), I click download and then your server concatenate that high config with all modules I chose to a single autoexec.cfg file which I just place in my <tf2-folder>/tf/cfg folder, I set up start parameters and I'm happy do use setup I wanted.

This would allow for some more flexibility, because let's say I want to have high quality models because I like how AWP looks like in game so I want to get a better look on it. It's only one cvar which doesn't do much. I can look for a config and change it easily.

Anyway, you're doing excellent job with these configs, really.
21
#21
0 Frags +

Hey all, love the feedback so far but could you help me figure out solutions to what I outlined in #10? I'm really having trouble thinking of a solution and I'd really appreciate your help.

Hey all, love the feedback so far but could you help me figure out solutions to what I outlined in #10? I'm really having trouble thinking of a solution and I'd really appreciate your help.
22
#22
-3 Frags +

a quick way to switch between various presets would be nice
its a huge pain to move around vpk's, and id gladly take the ~2 MiB bloat for all the presets in exchange

a quick way to switch between various presets would be nice
its a huge pain to move around vpk's, and id gladly take the ~2 MiB bloat for all the presets in exchange
23
#23
20 Frags +

how hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.

how hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.
24
#24
0 Frags +
lethhow hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.

Depends on what you mean by simple

[quote=leth]how hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.[/quote]
Depends on what you mean by simple
25
#25
5 Frags +

some people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple as

some people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple as
26
#26
1 Frags +

I think its really important to recognise that all preset VPKs are the same with a few exceptions:

  • exec presets/(presetname) in autoexec.cfg
  • disabling sounds and decals in dxsupport_override.cfg for lower presets

Would it be possible to release mastercomfig as a zip with batch and bash scripts to package into a VPK file if you want?

So a user could copy comfig.cfg and add their presets and it would be a bit meh for them but they'd get most of the benefits for those that don't want/care about the amazing job you've done making a properly modular and extensible tf2 config.

However people that want to put in the time to learn about how it works can do a full install, for example having a folder in /tf/mastercomfig with scripts that compress to /tf/custom/mastercomfig

tldr; two install options: simple and full

I think its really important to recognise that all preset VPKs are the same with a few exceptions:
[list]
[*] exec presets/(presetname) in autoexec.cfg
[*] disabling sounds and decals in dxsupport_override.cfg for lower presets
[/list]

Would it be possible to release mastercomfig as a zip with batch and bash scripts to package into a VPK file if you want?

So a user could copy comfig.cfg and add their presets and it would be a bit meh for them but they'd get most of the benefits for those that don't want/care about the amazing job you've done making a properly modular and extensible tf2 config.

However people that want to put in the time to learn about how it works can do a full install, for example having a folder in /tf/mastercomfig with scripts that compress to /tf/custom/mastercomfig

tldr; two install options: simple and full
27
#27
2 Frags +
mastercomslethhow hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.

Depends on what you mean by simple

by simple i dont mean a lesser simpler gfx.cfg, i mean as long as its just 1 file its more simple

also when it comes to update it would just be a case of replacing the old gfx.cfg with the new one, and as long as u have exec gfx.cfg in ur autoexec it shouldnt effect anything

and as for to customising i just have all the settings i want exec after the gfx.cfg

[quote=mastercoms][quote=leth]how hard would it be to just release a simple gfx.cfg alternative alongside the vpk version

even if it is worse than the vpk version it could be better than old comanglias and alot of people would use it.

pretty sure im using a gfx.cfg version that i found in your discord a long time ago and it works just fine.[/quote]

Depends on what you mean by simple[/quote]

by simple i dont mean a lesser simpler gfx.cfg, i mean as long as its just 1 file its more simple

also when it comes to update it would just be a case of replacing the old gfx.cfg with the new one, and as long as u have exec gfx.cfg in ur autoexec it shouldnt effect anything

and as for to customising i just have all the settings i want exec after the gfx.cfg
28
#28
1 Frags +
lethby simple i dont mean a lesser simpler gfx.cfg, i mean as long as its just 1 file its more simple

also when it comes to update it would just be a case of replacing the old gfx.cfg with the new one, and as long as u have exec gfx.cfg in ur autoexec it shouldnt effect anything

and as for to customising i just have all the settings i want exec after the gfx.cfg

I'm having a hard time understanding what the difference would be vs a VPK in that case. There's still extra setup of adding exec gfx. It's just the other way around in the VPK, the config exec user/autoexec (and for class configs, too). If it was the opposite way, people would have to edit each of their class configs as well. Why should one be preferred over the other in your opinion?

scrambledI think its really important to recognise that all VPKs are the same with a few exceptions:
  • exec presets/(presetname) in autoexec.cfg
  • disabling sounds and decals in dxsupport_override.cfg for lower presets

Would it be possible to release mastercomfig as a zip with batch and bash scripts to package into a VPK file if you want?

So a user could copy comfig.cfg and add their presets and it would be a bit meh for them but they'd get most of the benefits for those that don't want/care about the amazing job you've done making a properly modular and extensible tf2 config.

However people that want to put in the time to learn about how it works can do a full install, for example having a folder in /tf/mastercomfig with scripts that compress to /tf/custom/mastercomfig

tldr; two install options: simple and full

Wouldn't that be more complicated? Then you have to edit a bunch of files, set up a bunch of execs, and then package it using scripts. (btw, I already release a zip package which is what the VPK is based on). In any case, it is a bunch of work that one would have to redo every time they update. Can you go more into why this would be preferable to some people and how they would use it so I can set it up properly?

hamahamsome people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple as

Could you go into more detail about how you use a .cfg file to be more easily customizable than mastercomfig is?

[quote=leth]by simple i dont mean a lesser simpler gfx.cfg, i mean as long as its just 1 file its more simple

also when it comes to update it would just be a case of replacing the old gfx.cfg with the new one, and as long as u have exec gfx.cfg in ur autoexec it shouldnt effect anything

and as for to customising i just have all the settings i want exec after the gfx.cfg[/quote]
I'm having a hard time understanding what the difference would be vs a VPK in that case. There's still extra setup of adding exec gfx. It's just the other way around in the VPK, the config exec user/autoexec (and for class configs, too). If it was the opposite way, people would have to edit each of their class configs as well. Why should one be preferred over the other in your opinion?

[quote=scrambled]I think its really important to recognise that all VPKs are the same with a few exceptions:
[list]
[*] exec presets/(presetname) in autoexec.cfg
[*] disabling sounds and decals in dxsupport_override.cfg for lower presets
[/list]

Would it be possible to release mastercomfig as a zip with batch and bash scripts to package into a VPK file if you want?

So a user could copy comfig.cfg and add their presets and it would be a bit meh for them but they'd get most of the benefits for those that don't want/care about the amazing job you've done making a properly modular and extensible tf2 config.

However people that want to put in the time to learn about how it works can do a full install, for example having a folder in /tf/mastercomfig with scripts that compress to /tf/custom/mastercomfig

tldr; two install options: simple and full[/quote]
Wouldn't that be more complicated? Then you have to edit a bunch of files, set up a bunch of execs, and then package it using scripts. (btw, I already release a zip package which is what the VPK is based on). In any case, it is a bunch of work that one would have to redo every time they update. Can you go more into why this would be preferable to some people and how they would use it so I can set it up properly?

[quote=hamaham]some people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple as[/quote]
Could you go into more detail about how you use a .cfg file to be more easily customizable than mastercomfig is?
29
#29
8 Frags +
mastercomsscrambled...Wouldn't that be more complicated? Then you have to edit a bunch of files, set up a bunch of execs, and then package it using scripts. (btw, I already release a zip package which is what the VPK is based on). In any case, it is a bunch of work that one would have to redo every time they update. Can you go more into why this would be preferable to some people and how they would use it so I can set it up properly?

Keep in mind that a lot of people who are interested in custom configs already have one and know how it works, roughly. Releasing one comfig.cfg for people to plonk in /custom and add exec comfig and preset=medium to their autoexec.cfg that they're already familiar with and comfortable using might be preferable to some random file that changes everything they're used to using. The zip package is not branded as a functional install but more of a here's the code for nerds to look through, useless to the end user.

A power user could go to /tf/mastercomfig and run a script that clones and makes the comfig to their settings (presets etc.)

[quote=mastercoms]
[quote=scrambled]...[/quote]
Wouldn't that be more complicated? Then you have to edit a bunch of files, set up a bunch of execs, and then package it using scripts. (btw, I already release a zip package which is what the VPK is based on). In any case, it is a bunch of work that one would have to redo every time they update. Can you go more into why this would be preferable to some people and how they would use it so I can set it up properly?
[/quote]
Keep in mind that a lot of people who are interested in custom configs already have one and know how it works, roughly. Releasing one comfig.cfg for people to plonk in /custom and add exec comfig and preset=medium to their autoexec.cfg that they're already familiar with and comfortable using might be preferable to some random file that changes everything they're used to using. The zip package is not branded as a functional install but more of a here's the code for nerds to look through, useless to the end user.

A power user could go to /tf/mastercomfig and run a script that clones and makes the comfig to their settings (presets etc.)
30
#30
5 Frags +
mastercomshamahamsome people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple asCould you go into more detail about how you use a .cfg file to be more easily customizable than mastercomfig is?

its 1 cfg file with comments on what each command does, no aliases, everything sorted after category (mat commands in mat category, r commands in r category, seperated by //------------------)

[quote=mastercoms]
[quote=hamaham]some people prefer losing some settings in favor for a more easily customizable config (.cfg file) simple as[/quote]
Could you go into more detail about how you use a .cfg file to be more easily customizable than mastercomfig is?[/quote]
its 1 cfg file with comments on what each command does, no aliases, everything sorted after category (mat commands in mat category, r commands in r category, seperated by //------------------)
1 2
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.