Hey guys,

Hearing all the complaints about how complicated the updating procedure is for W:A, I decided to take a shot at writing an installer. Thus, I downloaded NSIS (http://nsis.sourceforge.net/Main_Page), and after a few days of script-writing and testing, managed at creating a fairly user-friendly installer for the beta updates.

Features:

automatically detects your W:A folder from a registry key
warns the user if you try to install the update to a folder without a valid W:A installation
detects unpatched (early European) versions of the game, and offers to download and install the patch automatically
detects unpatched versions of the game with an incorrectly-installed beta update (without the patch)
detects TryMedia versions, and offers to download and install TryMedia's 3.5 Beta 2 update if appropriate (but still suggests installing a CD-ROM version)


The installer downloads the 3.0 patch from the official FTP (here (ftp://ftp.team17.com/pub/t17/patches/pc/WAPatch.exe)) and the TryMedia 3.5 Beta 2 update from the URL they lately distribute with the game (here (http://fe.trymedia.com/d/team17/20m_d_p3050b/WA_P3050_Beta2.exe)). The downloads are saved to your W:A folder.

The installer also supports silent install. An example of the command-line syntax for silent installs is:
WA_update-3.6.26.5_Beta_Install.exe /S /D=C:\Team17\Worms Armageddon

Given that the current state of W:A isn't ready for release just yet, I decided to re-package the 3.6.26.5 version with the new installer.
You can download it here: http://worms.thecybershadow.net/files/WA_update-3.6.26.5_Beta_Installer.exe

Your comments are very welcome.

Good. This should have been done in the first place. Welldone.

Great!
I also thought about make this, and also in NSIS :P.
Hope this will help ;)

Regards,
ADX

Does it install the update as well?

This is the update. In installer form.

Here's my common question:

Will it install WA on XP x64 Edition?

It is not a Worms Armageddon installer. It is a Worms Armageddon update installer.

Ah yes (slaps forhead). Silly me.

I made the same misinterpretation, as did Muzer. Hmmm.

Very nice, I will be able to integrate this with my autoupdate/updatecheck.

One comment is, it should display the Beta Licence Agreement, it doesnt seem to...

More suggestions:

1. Shoudnt the top bar have that WA reactor sign in dark (like the original WA installer).
2. In fact, that top bar does not comply with the Windows UI Guidelines. I believe NSIS does have an option to have the pic on the right (then again, neither does InstallShield, the pic on the right should be a small pic, not that funky InstallShield thingy). Either that or I hate NSIS (I prefer Inno), or im just some sort of picky UI designer guy).
3. Can we have backups, so we can restore the old version if the new one doesnt work.

1. Shoudnt the top bar have that WA reactor sign in dark (like the original WA installer).
2. In fact, that top bar does not comply with the Windows UI Guidelines. I believe NSIS does have an option to have the pic on the right (then again, neither does InstallShield, the pic on the right should be a small pic, not that funky InstallShield thingy). Either that or I hate NSIS (I prefer Inno), or im just some sort of picky UI designer guy).


Who cares! Look how much work he's been doing over the last few years!

The link doesn't work for me :(

Run has a mirror of the installer on his nanacide.com website, here: http://www.nanacide.com/wahelp/WA_update-3.6.26.5_Beta_Installer.exe

canofworms: because vBulletin doesn't anyhow alert you when someone has edited a post in a thread, even if you're subscribed to the thread, I haven't noticed your suggestions until now.

I don't really understand the first two suggestions. Could you link me to the Windows UI guidelines you're referring to? NSIS's Modern UI defaults to having the image on the top bar on the left, and I'm quite convinced that it fits there quite well.

I've just looked at InnoSetup, and, aside for the Pascal scripting, I don't see any obvious advantage over NSIS. Also I don't see a way to extend it programmatically (NSIS has support for installation-time DLL plugins), and I haven't found a way to download files during the installation process (which my installer does in some cases).

Regarding backups: I think that would only create a mess if you were to install several versions one on top of another, and would cause more confusion. You can always revert to an older version using this page (http://wiki.thecybershadow.net/Beta_updates_(Worms_Armageddon)).

Run has a mirror of the installer on his nanacide.com website, here: http://www.nanacide.com/wahelp/WA_update-3.6.26.5_Beta_Installer.exe


Thank you!

Hmm, installer can't seem to connect...

Maybe I should just buy it again...only not from trymedia.

So much for getting it without a cd to avoid loseing the cd...:(

Hmm, installer can't seem to connect...
Maybe I should just buy it again...only not from trymedia.
The Trymedia version isn't patchable anyway. Only works with CD versions.

Who cares! Look how much work he's been doing over the last few years!

Because I am a picky UI designer, and I will stop at nothing to make sure that UIs follow the proper guidlines.

Cybershadow: http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms737969.aspx << That is the exact explanation of the Wizard 97 UI Layout for Inner Pages, but the rest of the guide is worth a read.

Of course its no biggy, but like your sig says, there is no such thing as a perfect program :)

Ok, so where on that page does it say that the picture has to be on the right?

Or do we need to copycat MS exactly now, otherwise the application will fail some MS UI standard specification?

I can understand "picky", but not when it's apparently "let's copycat Microsoft, because they are obviously SO much better at this than we could ever be". That way you can't possibly get an usable application done in a good timeframe.

If this were GNOME, I'd agree that it's important to follow the UI guidelines to create a consistent user experience.

But..consistent user experience..on Windows? Too many developers, including Microsoft, create programs that specifically make their widgets look different from the widgets everywhere else, thus undermining consistency. Best to focus your efforts on something more attainable..

As for the image on the right thing, im sure thats the default way the CreateWizardPage or whatever it is called API call works. http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms737992.aspx << Just found the explanation, but its your choice :)

As for the GNOME thing, I usually have no choice, Glade forces me to be standard, which is fine with me :)



But..consistent user experience..on Windows? Too many developers, including Microsoft, create programs that specifically make their widgets look different from the widgets everywhere else, thus undermining consistency. Best to focus your efforts on something more attainable..



And don't get me started on MFC :P

Anyway, I have made and argued my point, if you do not use it, fine with me, it is your installer at the end of the day :)

(The fun I will have when designing the interfaces for the OS I am writing...)