SC4 Dat Packer

[z]

I think that the effect you suggest is generally true, however unless the DatPacker has been modified it will simply overwrite (not refuse to overwrite as you've suggested above) the first info.

So in other words, it sounds like I can ignore the duplicate files from the LEX DVD, and I won't get duplicates in the compressed files.  True?  I don't care if it takes a lot longer to DATPack the files - I hardly ever do it.  It sounds like it would be good to make the LEX DVD the first folder, though.

Some folk argue that in theory the datpacker should only help for "load times" but I and others have shown that it does in fact improve performance under certain conditions and the file handles count is the only thing I can think of that changes significantly..

I can tell you two other places where it makes a HUGE difference - even more than the initial load time.  The first is in the time required to return from the Zones view to the normal view.  The second is in returning from the new NAM Subway Building View to the normal view, since that is now essentially a modified version of the Zones view.  In both cases, the DATPacker cuts long waits down to almost nothing.  The reduced file handle count makes a lot of sense here.

[SC4BOY]

So in other words, it sounds like I can ignore the duplicate files from the LEX DVD, and I won't get duplicates in the compressed files.  True?  I don't care if it takes a lot longer to DATPack the files - I hardly ever do it.  It sounds like it would be good to make the LEX DVD the first folder, though.

That's correct as long as an "outdated" file doesn't overwrite an "updated" file.. as I said they are order dependent.. they process files in "DOS order"

I can tell you two other places where it makes a HUGE difference - even more than the initial load time.  The first is in the time required to return from the Zones view to the normal view.  The second is in returning from the new NAM Subway Building View to the normal view, since that is now essentially a modified version of the Zones view.  In both cases, the DATPacker cuts long waits down to almost nothing.  The reduced file handle count makes a lot of sense here.

So we have more "YAY!" user datapoints?

[olegario39]

Wouanagaine, is there a way to unpack the compressed file? i want to change a texture mod and i cant open the compressed file. 

how should i do it? 

[SC4BOY]

The compressed file is not where you should do your mods and maintenance.. DatPacker was never aimed at that.. Maintain your original plugins folder contents and re-datpack it.

[kyero]

Am I just blind or where can I get the gem of a program called DatPacker?  My load times are getting bad and I sure could use some help.

Thanks

Kelly

[io_bg]

Am I just blind or where can I get the gem of a program called DatPacker?  My load times are getting bad and I sure could use some help.

Thanks

Kelly

From the LEX

[kyero]

This was wonderful. In completing my first datpacking I found a few things that I assume are true, but would like validation.

1. It would seem that all dat files need to be in sub folder for datpacker to include them in the packing, true?

2. It looks as if the only things that get compressed are the dat files, or at least that is the end result of the packing. Does this mean that the only thing that really needs to be in the plugins folder are the dat files? Everything else is additional info or unnecessary files?

3. I noticed that the instructions said 'not' to pack any of the essentials files. What will be the result if you do? I packed everything and the game seems to work just fine.

Thanks for the help!

[JoeST]

It packs the contents of the subdirectories into dat files.

The only reason not to pack essential files is that they are already packed.

Joe

[kyero]

So packing the essentials files to make one compressed folder in the plugins folder won't hurt anything. I just like it when I can simplify a process.

[z]

1. It would seem that all dat files need to be in sub folder for datpacker to include them in the packing, true?

Yes.  Each subfolder becomes a separate .dat file.  However, subfolders that it may contain become part of the same .dat file.

2. It looks as if the only things that get compressed are the dat files, or at least that is the end result of the packing. Does this mean that the only thing that really needs to be in the plugins folder are the dat files? Everything else is additional info or unnecessary files?

The .dat file type is actually a sort of miscellaneous file type.  So all files of types SC4MODEL, SC4DESC, SC4LOT, etc. are also packed.  Basically, anything that is needed for the operation of the game is packed.  Things like Readme files, JPG files, etc. are simply skipped.

3. I noticed that the instructions said 'not' to pack any of the essentials files. What will be the result if you do? I packed everything and the game seems to work just fine.

The problem with packing essential files is that if they change, you have to repack their containing folder.  For the same reason, you shouldn't pack the NAM, which has frequent updates, or RTMT, where packing would interfere with its customization options.

[kyero]

Gotcha! Thanks a bunch. This really helps. 

[slystone2]

hello, long time lurker, first time question-asker...

I have a couple of questions regarding datpacker

it's my understanding that packing NAM and essentials is only a bad idea because you would need to repack them if they are updated, not because it effects how those plugins behave, correct? So technically, repacking NAM and other dependancies is fine, it just means if you update you would need to repack.

Also, does packing effect large Mega packs in any way? Specifically the Simgoober Mega Packs that contain multiple lots/models - because there are so many lots already packed in those files, would including them in plugins folders that you Datpack effect their ability to grow or anything?

#3: What exactly is the "Repacking" option in the main Datpacker menu for?

Last question - if a file in a particular lot plugin is labled "PLOP" or "LM", is it okay to remove that file without effecting the growable lot? It's my understanding that as long as there is a model, a lot, and a file for the growable (labled with a R$$ or C$$, for example), the PLOP or LM (Landmark?) file aren't needed for the growable to function - they are just there to allow you to plop them. Correct or no?
The reason is, I don't use ploppables, and would like to trim down my Landmarks folder for easier access, and to trim my plugins folder for better performance as well. Seems like a waste of space to have all those PLOP and LM files there for no reason. I just don't want to screw anything up.

thanks in advance for any answers, love the site!

[z]

it's my understanding that packing NAM and essentials is only a bad idea because you would need to repack them if they are updated, not because it effects how those plugins behave, correct? So technically, repacking NAM and other dependancies is fine, it just means if you update you would need to repack.

Yes.

Also, does packing effect large Mega packs in any way? Specifically the Simgoober Mega Packs that contain multiple lots/models - because there are so many lots already packed in those files, would including them in plugins folders that you Datpack effect their ability to grow or anything?

No.

#3: What exactly is the "Repacking" option in the main Datpacker menu for?

I'm just putting my new computer together, so I don't have DatPacker up yet, and can't answer that.  Anyone else?

Last question - if a file in a particular lot plugin is labled "PLOP" or "LM", is it okay to remove that file without effecting the growable lot?

Yes; I do that all the time.

[Andreas]

IIRC, "Force Repacking" means to compile a DAT from scratch. If you just want to update a DAT, you can simply add the new loose files to the folder with the DAT and merge everything into a new DAT. But like with the NAM items, some files might be obsolete in future versions, so I wouldn't trust the automatisms too much, but rather use your uncompressed source folder, update the files manually and prune it from outdated stuff, and then run DatPacker for creating a fresh copy of the DAT(s).

[slystone2]

Great! Thanks to both of you for confirming those things, i really appreciate it! 

[wouanagaine]

Hi

it's my understanding that packing NAM and essentials is only a bad idea because you would need to repack them if they are updated, not because it effects how those plugins behave, correct? So technically, repacking NAM and other dependancies is fine, it just means if you update you would need to repack.

yes, rerun datpacker as soon as you add new files or change files in your plugins folder

Also, does packing effect large Mega packs in any way? Specifically the Simgoober Mega Packs that contain multiple lots/models - because there are so many lots already packed in those files, would including them in plugins folders that you Datpack effect their ability to grow or anything?

no, the gameplay should be identical with or without datpacked files, only the load speed, and stability is better with datpacked files

#3: What exactly is the "Repacking" option in the main Datpacker menu for?

By default, if you rerun datpacker on an already packed folder, it will re create the packed file only if it detects a modification in the folder. Sometimes datpacker is unable to detect such a modification, so you'll have to check that option to force it to rebuild the file

Last question - if a file in a particular lot plugin is labled "PLOP" or "LM", is it okay to remove that file without effecting the growable lot? It's my understanding that as long as there is a model, a lot, and a file for the growable (labled with a R$$ or C$$, for example), the PLOP or LM (Landmark?) file aren't needed for the growable to function - they are just there to allow you to plop them. Correct or no?
The reason is, I don't use ploppables, and would like to trim down my Landmarks folder for easier access, and to trim my plugins folder for better performance as well. Seems like a waste of space to have all those PLOP and LM files there for no reason. I just don't want to screw anything up.

yes, as far as you can trust the name to reflect the function of the file

[markouellette]

Big time reduction on program and city loading times, as well as improvement on in game play speed.

A while ago a question was posed about getting more information on files noted as "Useless files, all entries have been superseed in..."
I can't see a respone, and was wondering the same thing.  Are these files that have since been combined into Megapacks?  Can I delete them? There are lots, models .desc files and .sav files coming up with this message.

[wouanagaine]

I won't bother delete them, to much hassle to find them and not sure you'll get that much harddrive space back

"Useless files" are useless because there is one or more files that redefines all of what the useless file defined, and they are loaded after this one

[markouellette]

Thanks Wouanagaine.  Since it ain't broke, I won't fix it.

[Jonathan]

Is there anyway to change the location of where Datpacker looks for folder to pack?
Because I'd like to have folder where I install my plugins(and the game doesn't see this folder), then run datpacker which datpacks them into the plugins folder for the game to read.

Jonathan