|
|
Post by Gamesoul Master on Dec 16, 2006 3:44:54 GMT -5
Pretty self-explanatory. This is in no way meant to imply that the results will be taken into consideration by pSX Author. I'm only posting this pole to see for my own curiousity (and others' curiousity), which of these two features are in higher demand.
|
|
|
|
Post by patrickp on Dec 16, 2006 8:01:04 GMT -5
Actually, I feel no desperate need for either feature. But if I had to choose (you can let go of me now, GM!) I'd choose Cheat Support, and have.
|
|
|
|
Post by Melanogaster on Dec 16, 2006 10:26:36 GMT -5
I have many friends on the line waiting for an emulator to (decently) play online with me... So Netplay!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ultima on Dec 16, 2006 11:53:31 GMT -5
Cheat support has my vote.
[speculation]
For one thing, I can see developing/testing/tweaking for netplay taking longer than for cheat support, meaning that netplay would probably suck up a lot of development time. So that means means that if it takes higher priority, other features and stuff could get placed on the backburner for a while ;o
[/speculation]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2006 12:56:36 GMT -5
Out of the two, I choose netplay.
But neither of them is important to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by kinghanco on Dec 17, 2006 4:09:39 GMT -5
Netplay will slowdown the games when playing online. Trust me. It not worth it.
Cheat support will be the best thing to do for pSX.
Why not put cheat support on pSX Frontend instead of putting on the psxfin? This way cheat support won't screwup the psxfin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamesoul Master on Dec 17, 2006 4:31:10 GMT -5
I once considering integrating cheat support into *my* frontend... lol. At least in some way. Maybe I'll actually do it. Then there'd be some competition... XD
|
|
|
|
Post by TheCloudOfSmoke on Dec 17, 2006 4:34:51 GMT -5
Ooooh!  Those sound like some fight words to me. J/K. That would be awesome GM. Can't wait for it! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Gamesoul Master on Dec 17, 2006 4:58:17 GMT -5
Yeah... maybe build in some converters for converting cheat codes to hex addresses and work with that... it's definitely workable. Of course... that kind of thing would leave people irritated if I didn't include a GUI, though I can easily imagine how to integrate it into my current DOS-style frontend...
|
|
|
|
Post by patrickp on Dec 17, 2006 7:30:28 GMT -5
Netplay will slowdown the games when playing online. Trust me. It not worth it... I suppose it would depend on the players' connections - and that the people who want netplay would probably be aware of this. Well, there's GM answering your question for you. @gm: what about doing a cheat interface as an add-on for Ultima's Frontend? He could, perhaps, do an optional extra tab which would serve as a GUI for the cheat application? Edit: maybe you could call it 'Gamesoul Master's Ultima Frontend Backend.' ;D It occurs to me that you might have to modify it for different versions of pSX? |
|
|
|
Post by Ultima on Dec 17, 2006 10:07:25 GMT -5
That would be a very interesting idea, and would go nicely with game profiles and such, but I think GM would want to write his own frontend  And if Gamesoul Master can auto-detect where he should start editing the memory, then needing to modify it for different versions shouldn't be a problem. kinghanco: I'm pretty sure it's not possible to do memory editing with AutoIt (or at least with the functionality required for cheating, like locking values and such), so in its current state/form, there'd be no way to implement cheat functionality into pSX Frontend. |
|
|
|
Post by stranger90 on Dec 17, 2006 16:40:33 GMT -5
I don't vote, all two ideas are good!
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamesoul Master on Dec 17, 2006 21:01:00 GMT -5
That would be a very interesting idea, and would go nicely with game profiles and such, but I think GM would want to write his own frontend Umm... but I already *have* written one... lol. But I know what you mean. To be honest... I don't mind doing it either way. If it would be easier, I could write a small program instead of expanding my frontend, and just have it run off commandline options instead. That way, he could write the tab, and once the user inputs the codes and hits "Activate" or whatever, it can pull the text fields and send them through the commandline. I'll have to see if I can figure out how to implement commandline options in a C++ program... I've never tried. If I don't figure that part out, I can always implement it into *my* frontend. Mine's still a bit inferior to Ultima's, and a few things still need to be made robust in the newer features, but... I now know I can write a GUI for it. So at least that's a plus. Either way... I'm more concerned about getting some solid cheat support out there than trying to make my frontend better or something. Ultima has done a fine job, and just knowing I provided some motivation is a great thing. Anything to help people further enjoy this wonderful emulator.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ultima on Dec 17, 2006 21:05:49 GMT -5
Frontend = GUI if you prefer As for commandline options... it shouldn't be too hard. Isn't one of the *sorta* standard signatures for the main function int main(int argc, char **argv)? It's how I learned it in systems programming anyway. You simply parse argv. For one of my systems programming projects, I had to write a clone for ls (the utility for listing the directory in UNIX), and duplicated MANY of its commandline options, so if you need a hand, I might be able to help (By the way, there might be a standard header you can import for functions to parse the inputed arguments, but I can't remember it at the moment -- I did the commandline parsing on my own) |
|
|
|
Post by Gamesoul Master on Dec 17, 2006 21:09:17 GMT -5
Well... once I start cracking on the main code, and I have everything written, I'll see you about the commandline options if I don't figure it out. But... that looks pretty simple. I should've guessed it'd go something like that... lol.
Edit: What version of C++ would that be in, if you know? As I mentioned before, I very strongly prefer 5.0/6.0, and that's the version I write everything in. Writing C++ through Visual Studio 2005 is a pain, as everything is done so differently.
|
|
Those sound like some fight words to me. J/K.
And if Gamesoul Master can auto-detect where he should start editing the memory, then needing to modify it for different versions shouldn't be a problem.
