Tale of Installing the Sword Coast

[mir_ror]

HELP!!

The hard disk space requirement for ToTSC is stated to be 600 MB, but after installation, the game itself took up 750-odd MB (without the movie clips) - I've had to continually shift files on my original hard disk during the installation itself!
Well, maybe it meant that the add-on itself takes up 600 MB (to take up a massive 1.2 gig space on my ancient computer), but I doubt it. To make things worse, I can't even start up the game now that I've only 20++ MB left in my hard disk ("...not enough memory in hard disk..."). Any suggestions?

PS I'm thinking of playing some modules in turn (Ulgoth's Beard and Durlag's Tower first, then later Werewolf Island etc), deleting and re-installing each time (can I keep my characters in between?). But this seems way too tedious; what do you'll say?

[stred]

i think that in my system the game took about 550 mb! 2 things to check:
1)run a scandisk,maybe some bad clusters eating hd space (a friend of mine had lost that way about 1 giga!!)
2)u have fat32 aren't u? (cause small files that tosc has want much more space in fat16)

p.s. remember thar tosc makes the minimum temp drive from 80mb to 140 mb.

[stred]

i think that in my system the game took about 550 mb! 2 things to check:
1)run a scandisk,maybe some bad clusters eating hd space (a friend of mine had lost that way about 1 giga!!)
2)u have fat32 aren't u? (cause small files that tosc has want much more space in fat16)

p.s. remember thar tosc makes the minimum temp drive from 80mb to 140 mb.

Or you can get yourself an additional hard drive. www.pricewatch.com has hard drives from 2.1 gig to 80 gigs listed, and the prices are much (I repeat, much) cheaper than any retail stores out there. The 2.1 are 41 dollars, and the best value I've found on that site are the 6.4 gigs from 52 to 65 dollar range (not including shipping and handling).

Hope this helps somewhat.

You're welcome.

FAT 16 and FAT 32 are what they call "File Allotment Types" and as you can see there are two numbers, 16 and 32. As color, these refer to bits. Let's suppose you have a library. You have 20 sets of encyclopedias and each set has 20 books. Let's call that FAT 16. What FAT 32 is supposedly can do is condense each set to one book (maybe 2 to 5 but for sake of simplicity let's say 1). so instead of 400 books, you now have 20 books. Win95 uses FAT 16 and Win98 uses FAT 32. But frankly, it's not that big of a deal because Win 95 isn't that bad in file management. However, one word of warning, just because FAT 32 is twice the compression of FAT 16, you cannot use them in either file sets. Remember that although they have the same content, they are different. The 20 set might have different covers and typeface; whereas, the 1 book will have another cover and a different typeface. Hope this helps, I don't think it pertains much to your situation. FAT 16 also has a 1.2 Gig limit per drive, and FAT 32 has none (theoretically). So if you have Win 95, then I suggest you upgrade from 95 to 98 to make sure that you can upgrade your harddrive.

Hard drive do not have hardware conflicts because it's assigned letters (and numbers). They can share the same IRQ, and you can have up to (I think) 50 harddrives in 95 and 120 in Win 98. Why, I don't know. It's how they set it up. The best upgrade for your computer if it's an old one is to get a brand new computer (yes, it's expensive), but there are good computer companies like Alienware (www.alienware.com) or Falcon-Northwest (www.falon-nw.com). Those companies are expensive but at least you can get an idea what kind of equipment you can get for yourself. Hope this helps.

Hardware conflicts can be common (in Win95 and 3.1 they were a pain, but seem to have settled in 9 but what kind of conflicts are you talking about?

[mir_ror]

Stred: I've just run scandisk (Standard) and found no trace of any missing clusters / bad sectors; I also don't think the "increased" cache size is the problem (since my original installation already had 140 MB cached). But exactly what is "fat32" and "fat16"?

Slag-king: Thanks for your suggestion, I will look into the possibility of getting another hard disk (this is unknown territory for me; btw, are hardware conflicts common? ).

[Archaon]

actually.. FAT stands for "file Allocation Table"...hehhe...and yes hes right upgrade....i just uprgraded my 333 celeron so it has 128mb of ram stead of 32mb..and the difference is unbelievable..also buying a new hard drrive is essential you should always make sure you hae like 100-200mb free for the swap file and getting a new video card helps speed up preformance...( i just bought a nVIDIA geoforce 256 gts II)..well have fun..

Thanks for the correction! I couldn't remember what that "T" stood for!

[stred]

if you wanna see if u have fat16 or 32 go to your hd properties and in file system will have fat16 or fat32.if you have fat16 make it fat32.(i think that it will delete all your files i am not sure )

Well, stred, you might want to make sure that you back up all the important files before you upgrade from FAT 16 to FAT 32 (just a word of caution). Converting the files to 32 does not delete the old files in 16, but it can render them useless. Besides Win 95 doesn't have FAT 32 only Win 98 and up. Win NT has a completely different FAT. I have four o/s on my one computer (which is a chore to do) and Win95 on my 486 DX 50 computer (yes you read that right!). On my other computer, I have Linux (Red Hat 6.2), BeOS, 98, and NT 4.0 (I hate 2000 professional). Each four requires a completely different file type. Thanks to Partition Magic, I was able to do that. For 98, I made sure that I began my partitioned drive as FAT 32, then I installed everything there.

For mir_ror, I believe you have Win95 right? If so, don't worry about converting the files from FAT16 to FAT32. You just might want to get yourself another hard drive.