Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

The Mission Builder thread

92 replies to this topic
Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#1

Posted 15 November 2004 - 06:20 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 18 January 2005 - 08:16 AM.

GTA SA PS2 MB v0.33 released.

http://home.tiscali....99/SA-MB033.zip

New stuff in version 0.33:
- Proper support for custom global variables and arrays
(because the new memory system has finally been debugged).
- Setting up an array at address 0 didn't work. Fixed.
- New label format in decompiler.
- Decompiler now supports custom label names.
- Custom global variable names removed from the 'sascm.ini'
and put in 'variables.ini' with a new easier format.

New stuff in version 0.32:
- Opcode parameter definition 't%' in the 'SAscm.ini' file was changed
to use objects from the 'default.ide' file only while 'o%' is used
with any objects.
- Named references to the second segment objects added.
- Original mission titles added to hardcoded mission descriptions.
- Some cosmetical bugs fixed. :-)

--------------

GTA Vice City Mission Builder v1.41 released.

New:
CODE
DEFINE OBJECT BARREL4; object number irrelevant now
...
0107: $898 = create_object #BARREL4 at  284.3 -312.4  10.9


more in the readme. Links in my signature.

kuchar
  • kuchar

    Player Hater

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2004

#2

Posted 15 November 2004 - 06:24 PM

QUOTE (Barton Waterduck @ Nov 15 2004, 18:20)
This thread is for all future version of my Mission Builders for GTA San Andreas, PS2 and PC versions.

I'm currently working on support for the external scripts. I started with decompiling/disassembling the scripts in the 'script.img' to separate files. I ran into several practical problems and decided to decopile everything into one huge text file. All the missions have always been in one huge file anyway and it's easier to search for codes this way.

Two unknowns left. One in the beginning of the memory and one in the external script 'aaa.scm'. I'm guessing it has something to do with the variable string space since the first 4 bytes in this file is the size of the "usual" memory. Or it could be related to memory in the external files. I will try to track it down tomorrow.

New stuff: GXT reader. The GXT keys are coded in San Andreas. I used some code dans made for that. And a fully automatic internal IMG tool.

Did you do a gxt reader for SA? wow.gif

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#3

Posted 16 November 2004 - 08:13 PM

Version 0.3 released.

New stuff: GXT reader, automatic IMG tool to extract the scripts in the "script.img" file, "credit" files from GTA VC added, opcodes searching features brought back.

Known issues: Use a desktop resolution of 800x600 or higher. If lower, the
"open file" and "select destination path" dialog box will be too big.

Bugs fixed: Most of the 2nd segment object names didn't show up in the decompiled code in versions 0.1 and 0.2.

The math system used to code math related stuff without specifying the opcodes does not support arrays or local variables in this version.

Much more info in the readme.

Y_Less
  • Y_Less

    629

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004

#4

Posted 16 November 2004 - 08:46 PM

When you recompile, does it put the other scripts back in the separate file?

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#5

Posted 16 November 2004 - 09:00 PM

QUOTE (Y_Less @ Nov 16 2004, 21:46)
When you recompile, does it put the other scripts back in the separate file?

Yes, it recreates the "script.img" file. The "main.scm" and "script.img" file is recreated in the work/project/destination directory where the tables and "main.txt" file is. If you use "save as" on the "main.txt" the work/project/destination directory changes automatically and you get a messagebox asking if you want to copy the tables to the new work/project/destination directory.

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#6

Posted 17 November 2004 - 04:10 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 17 November 2004 - 04:12 PM.

Version 0.31 released.

This is like a bug-fix to version 0.3.

New stuff in Version 0.31:
- Main scripts with empty segments can now be decompiled and recompiled.
- A debug message has been removed.
- Some tiny potentional bugs removed.
- Math system complete. CyQ found the new math codes.

Code tested with the new math system using the compiler and decompiler. Opcode 08FA could be wrong. The code has not been tested ingame:
CODE
if  0
 $728($727,32i) ==  0
 $728($727,32f) ==  0.0
 $728($727,32s) ==  'test'
 $728($727,32v) ==  "test"
jf ££Label0146EB

if  0
 @728($727,32i) ==  0
 @728($727,32f) ==  0.0
 @728($727,32s) ==  'test'
 @728($727,32v) ==  "test"
jf ££Label0146EB

$1735 = $760($727,32i)
$1735 = $760($727,32f)
s$1735 = $760($727,32s)
v$1735 = $760($727,32v)
$760($727,32s) = 'test'
$760($727,32v) = "test"
s$1735 = 'test'
v$1735 = "test"

@1735 = $760($727,32i)
@1735 = $760($727,32f)
s@1735 = $760($727,32s)
v@1735 = $760($727,32v)
@760($727,32s) = 'test'
@760($727,32v) = "test"
s@1735 = 'test'
v@1735 = "test"

$728(1) = 123; same as $729 when DMA support enabled
$728(2) = 234; same as $730 when DMA support enabled
$728(3) = 345; same as $731 when DMA support enabled


Same code decompiled:
00D6: if  0
0038:   $728($727,32i) ==  0;; integer values
0042:   $728($727,32f) ==  0.0;; floating-point values
05AD:   $728($727,32s) == 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
08F9:   $728($727,32v) == "TEST";; 16-byte strings
004D: jump_if_false ££Label0118A1

00D6: if  0
0039:   @728($727,32i) ==  0;; integer values
0043:   @728($727,32f) ==  0.0;; floating-point values
05AE:   @728($727,32s) == 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
08FA:   @728($727,32,3) == "TEST";; 16-byte strings
004D: jump_if_false ££Label0118A1

0084: $1735 = $760($727,32i);; integer values and handles
0086: $1735 = $760($727,32f);; floating-point values only
05A9: s$1735 = $760($727,32s);; 8-byte strings
06D1: v$1735 = $760($727,32v);; 16-byte strings
05A9: $760($727,32s) = 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
06D1: $760($727,32v) = "TEST";; 16-byte strings
05A9: s$1735 = 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
06D1: v$1735 = "TEST";; 16-byte strings

008B: @1735 = $760($727,32i);; integer values and handles
0089: @1735 = $760($727,32f);; floating-point values only
05AA: s@1735 = $760($727,32s);; 8-byte strings
06D2: v@1735 = $760($727,32v);; 16-byte strings
05AA: @760($727,32s) = 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
06D2: @760($727,32,3) = "TEST";; 16-byte strings
05AA: s@1735 = 'TEST';; 8-byte strings
06D2: v@1735 = "TEST";; 16-byte strings

0004: $728(1) =  123;; integer values
0004: $728(2) =  234;; integer values
0004: $728(3) =  345;; integer values

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#7

Posted 26 November 2004 - 06:55 PM

Did you know that the PS2 version of GTA SA supports running it from a PS2 harddrive ? I guess it wouldn't make modding PS2 games automatically legal, but if you never mention it to anybody, who is going to know anyway ? And it's not like Rockstar is going to loose any money on it, not that much anyway. tounge.gif And you don't even need a modded PS2 to do this. Been wondering about these legal matters because of my PS2 Mission Builders. Wonder if Rockstar know about this builder. user posted image I have known about this for some time now (like several days) and I wasn't sure if I was even going to mention it like this. Oh well, I'm just a nervous geek I guess. sigh.gif What do you people think ? Should we be discussing SA mission script codes now or should we wait until the PC version is out ? Or should we just mod silently in the dark ? ph34r.gif Maby I even risk getting banned for posting this. cry.gif Also, since I'm already writing stuff, I've been posting about this MB on several other forums and most of them are deleted by moderators saying my tool is illegal. suicidal.gif That doesn't make things better. What I'm trying to say is that who on earth can keep a secret as big as this ? Not me anyway. We're talking about modding THE ps2 game of all times here and the retail version of it is actually moddable using any unmodded ps2's out there (except perhaps the new V12 version). All you need is a harddrive (40 GB to 120 GB (or higher with some unofficial patches)). I guess this post is long enough now. notify.gif

Opius
  • Opius

    General

  • Feroci Racing
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2002

#8

Posted 26 November 2004 - 06:59 PM

It's fully legal Barton. Don't worry.

Besides, it's not like anyone can tell you you can't do something to a game you own, on a console you own, with modifications you've made yourself.

Well, there's the DMCA, but that's outside the scope of this argument.

sleeper777
  • sleeper777

    Mission Coder | Help Guru | Tech Ninja

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2003

#9

Posted 01 December 2004 - 07:41 AM

I had many of the same thoughts BW when i saw articles about your software on other sites but no mention of the fact that these version were PS2 builders so i made it clear to them that the builder(s) should now have a platform(PC or PS2) Notation added to the downloads. or they should just direct all traffic to your pages....

I have a friend who is using his HD to mod a couple of other PS2 games. Not sure which ones but i agree with opius you bought it, you own it, you changed it..... no problem..... ph34r.gif

MarD
  • MarD

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2003

#10

Posted 02 December 2004 - 08:46 PM

Heyyo,

I agree, it's free, so it's legal. This's how 3rd party software/mods work in general: it can use parts of the original game and can be given to others AS LONG AS IT'S NOT SOLD FOR PROFITS. So since your mission builder is free, and doesn't include a whole pirated version of the game? it's legal, you have a tool for creating images yes, BUT it requires the user to already HAVE the game, further proving this program is legal. Hey, if R* diddn't like what we're doing? I'm sure they'd have stopped us by now, even they probably know aboot what we're doing.

I've got a great example of a company SUPPORTING a 3rd party mod, and I believe they actually sell their product too! and that's the machinima stylings of the series known as "Red Vs Blue: the chronicles of blood gultch." They use like, all aspects of Halo, and now? even Halo2, and Marathon (w00t! Marathon's free software, so you can download it, and mod it as you see fit and it's all legal! Also, Abuse is freeware! so dl that, n' start up a 2D side-scrolling shooting fury! biggrin.gif )

So yeah, Bungie diddn't shut down RvB, they supported it. R* may not have been so supportive of what we do, but they seem just as nice as Bungie since they're givin' out some classic games for free (GTA1's freeware... ok, it's not free software like Marathon1 with complete source codes, but it's still cool).

Don't worry aboot those other sites/forums, they're just paranoid dude, and don't truly support the modding community.

So BW? I say dude, keep going. The further you improve your mission builder while the PS2 version's out, the better the PC version will be. rah.gif

PlatinumSerb
  • PlatinumSerb

    ...

  • Members
  • Joined: 23 Mar 2004

#11

Posted 03 December 2004 - 12:18 AM

I thought only a few things were modable on the PS2 version. Is the Mission Script one of them?

Craig Kostelecky
  • Craig Kostelecky

    GTA:LC Team Leader

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2004

#12

Posted 03 December 2004 - 12:43 AM

I don't think anybody's successfully changed anything yet (or if they even tried). Not many people have the HDD to test this.

Y_Less
  • Y_Less

    629

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004

#13

Posted 03 December 2004 - 11:04 AM

You could use a ROM, but I think that may be illegal.

And yes, there are lots of exmples of companies supporting mods (Counter strike/ gunman chronicles for one (two)).

Just because Rockstar don't support the moding scene (and, as I understand it, they have covertly supported it a bit at some points), but they don't hate it. they said the files were free to be modded, so mod them. I don't think this could have gone un-noticed, especially with a community this big on the biggest gta site, and with all the publicity of myriad islands and LC.

If they didn't want it, they'd have stopped it LONG ago.

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#14

Posted 03 December 2004 - 12:27 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 04 December 2004 - 02:03 PM.

QUOTE (Craig Kostelecky @ Dec 3 2004, 01:43)
I don't think anybody's successfully changed anything yet (or if they even tried). Not many people have the HDD to test this.

The only people I know of that have successfully modded the mission script using the MB with a PS2 harddrive is some moderators and administrators at the norwegian gta forum http://www.gtaforum.no
It's also the only forum I know of in addition to this (or these) that doesn't have a problem with the MB's existens. I guess the reason is that they already knew all about gtaforums.com and my mods before I released my MB there. I also guess they respect me more because I haven't gone bonkers there yet.

Y_Less
  • Y_Less

    629

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004

#15

Posted 03 December 2004 - 02:08 PM

[offtopic]

QUOTE
I also guess they respect me more because I haven't gone bonkers there yet. 


I don't think thats something to be proud of or joke about. Alot of other people have been complaining about you recently, I don't like to take sides or say stuff, especially as I'm still quite new here, but I have to say i've noticed it as well and it aint good, especially when you start making fon of it

[/offtopic]

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#16

Posted 05 December 2004 - 06:24 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 05 December 2004 - 06:40 PM.

GTA Vice City Mission Builder v1.41 released.

New:
CODE
DEFINE OBJECT BARREL4; object number irrelevant now
...
0107: $898 = create_object #BARREL4 at  284.3 -312.4  10.9

more in the readme. Links in my signature.
And I could have tested it more but I think blush.gif it works (been playing half life 2 and counter strike (against the cheaters)).

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#17

Posted 10 December 2004 - 06:23 AM

I have decided to take down my GTA SA PS2 Mission Builder from my homepages since Rockstar regards any PS2 modding tools as warez tools. I have done this mostly to prevent my homepages from being taken down by my ISP's and possibly loosing my ISP's accounts. If modifying the game isn't against the forum rules at this time, I'm sure it will be pretty soon. This doesn't mean I have given up on modding my own version of the game. It simply means I can't release anything to the public. If any of you are still interrested in my work, just send me a PM and I will see what I can do.

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#18

Posted 15 January 2005 - 10:13 AM

Anyway, since nobody got any "serious issues" with my SA mission script mod, here's a link to the old v0.31 GTA SA Mission Builder:
http://home.tiscali....99/SA-MB031.zip

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#19

Posted 17 January 2005 - 06:30 AM

News: Been working like the retard I am (and I'm not just saying, it's my hobby) on my GTA SA Mission Builder. It now has easier to read labels like
CODE
:Two_Player_Thread
03A4: name_thread 'TPLAYER'

:TPLAYER_2
0001: wait  75 ms
00D6: if  0
0256:   player $PLAYER_CHAR defined
004D: jump_if_false ££TPLAYER_237

and what I posted, an ini file for custom labels (in addition to these automatically generated ones)

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#20

Posted 17 January 2005 - 09:37 AM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 17 January 2005 - 09:52 AM.

fidrouple posting (spelling ?)

OK, if anybody is interrested in helping me with the new 'customlabels.ini' and 'variables.ini' you could probably need the newest version of the SA MB.

GTA San Andreas, PS2 version, Mission Builder v0.33:
http://home.tiscali....99/SA-MB033.zip

New stuff in version 0.33:
- Proper support for custom global variables and arrays
(because the new memory system has finally been debugged).
- Setting up an array at address 0 didn't work. Fixed.
- New label format in decompiler.
- Decompiler now supports custom label names.
- Custom global variable names removed from the 'sascm.ini'
and put in 'variables.ini' with a new easier format.

New stuff in version 0.32:
- Opcode parameter definition 't%' in the 'SAscm.ini' file was changed
to use objects from the 'default.ide' file only while 'o%' is used
with any objects.
- Named references to the second segment objects added.
- Original mission titles added to hardcoded mission descriptions.
- Some cosmetical bugs fixed. :-)

The 0.32 version was never released (I think).

Don't use the 0.31 version or earlier versions. They should never have been released.
They don't handle any custom global variables correctly.

Craig Kostelecky
  • Craig Kostelecky

    GTA:LC Team Leader

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 28 Jan 2004

#21

Posted 17 January 2005 - 10:28 AM

I like the updates you've done here Barton. This is actually readable in its original decompiled form. I'll try to help you out with the variable and label names when LC isn't keeping me too busy. I'll give you a few variables now.
CODE
115, CUTSCENE_PLAYER
798, OYSTERS_COLLECTED (stat 243 is Oysters collected)
799, HORSESHOES_COLLECTED (stat 241)
800, PHOTO_OPS_TAKEN (stat 231)
801, TAGS_PAINTED
815, PERCENT_COMPLETED
That's all for now. I'll check out more later.

Y_Less
  • Y_Less

    629

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004

#22

Posted 17 January 2005 - 11:46 AM Edited by Y_Less, 17 January 2005 - 11:52 AM.

Barton: I tried 0.33 and it couldn't find any files, but they are definately there:

I eventually forced it to see the file by copying all the builder files to my data folder, it could see all those, but still couldn't see the main.scm file in the same folder, so I made 'copy of main.scm' , it found that (but still not the original) and I could open that.

Edit: got the pics:

user posted image
user posted image

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#23

Posted 17 January 2005 - 03:41 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 17 January 2005 - 04:56 PM.

QUOTE (Y_Less @ Jan 17 2005, 12:46)
Barton: I tried 0.33 and it couldn't find any files, but they are definately there:

I eventually forced it to see the file by copying all the builder files to my data folder, it could see all those, but still couldn't see the main.scm file in the same folder, so I made 'copy of main.scm' , it found that (but still not the original) and I could open that.

Edit: got the pics:

I did some tests. It seems it can't see files with certain properties, like hidden files. That's bad. Needs fixing. I guess that's what you get with borrowed codes. tounge.gif

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#24

Posted 17 January 2005 - 04:56 PM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 17 January 2005 - 06:24 PM.

Ok, I removed the file properties code in that "open file" dialog so it should accept anything. There still could be problems. If there are, I need to replace codes in the compiler and decompiler with "lower level" code (which I already have). Use the same link to get it.

edit: Updated again. Nothing in the MB checks for file properties so it should be compatible with anything. When a file is deleted, all file properties are removed before the file is deleted. There probably are some restrictions to that anyway, like, you shouldn't get administrator rights on a network you usually don't have administrator rights to by simply using this version of the MB. Not sure though. You never know with Microsoft. lol.gif

Y_Less
  • Y_Less

    629

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2004

#25

Posted 17 January 2005 - 06:39 PM

Lol, may have to test that out...

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#26

Posted 19 January 2005 - 03:32 AM

Found another bug. Memory related. All the memory the MB uses is allocated before it's used. The amount needed was estimated when the code was written and the code was initially written to be used with GTA VC. GTA SA has code that combined with the way the MB handles the new arrays gives you more data in each opcode parameter in the source code, like "$50byteslongcustomvariable50byteslongcustomvariable($50byteslongcustomvariable50byteslongcustomvariabl2,255i)". This parameter is 109 characters long. The current limit is about 51. Needs fixing.

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#27

Posted 20 January 2005 - 09:45 AM Edited by Barton Waterduck, 20 January 2005 - 09:55 AM.

News: SA MB converter seems to work now. Converted an older code to v0.33, recompiled and compared original scm with recompiled scm (all of it) (auto compare tool), 100% all ok. Could still be bugs in there though.

Memory report of the global variables when compile complete (in a messagebox). I guess it's a bit confusing at the moment. It reads like this (original code, recompile):
CODE
DMA global variable range: $2 - $10937
RAM global variable range: $10938 - $10940
RAM global variables used: $10940 - $10940  (allocated from top)
Free: $2 (8 bytes)    Total: $10940  (43760 bytes)

The point of it is to show how the "Direct Memory Access" system works, how many custom global variables that can be added, where those are added, the general amount of "4-bytes" variables you can fit in there and how much memory is allocated with DEFINE MEMORY.

Example, if you want to create a massive mod that requires DMA support, you can control where the MB places any custom global variables (that isn't part of the "DMA system"). If you want to allocate a total of 40 kb memory to be used with global variables and 20 of those to be used for "direct memory addressing", you simply write this anywhere in the code:
CODE
$5000 = 0; because 5000 X 4 = 20000 = 20kb
This makes the MB use the part of the memory above the 20kb for custom global variables. And if you haven't read the readme yet, all global variables that starts with a number is allocated at the address equals the number multiplied by 4. It also does this with 8-byte and 16-byte strings to make things easier. It even supports direct memory access using custom global variables at any address by simply using $<number><variable name>.

If you haven't got it yet, read on:
CODE
DMA global variable range: $2 - $10937

This is the memory area reserved for global variables placed wherever you want them in the memory. These global variables usually looks like the ones in the code block above.
CODE
RAM global variable range: $10938 - $10940

This is the memory area used by the MB to automatically place custom global variables at any free address.
CODE
RAM global variables used: $10940 - $10940  (allocated from top)

The amount of free memory in this memory area is reported in the end of the memory report. In this example, only 2 global variables are free because the $10940 variable represents the end of the memory and you can put anything there because it ends there so the largest usable global variable in this example is $10939. The memory report shows how many "4-byte" global variables you can fit. If you add "8-byte" or "16-byte" variables, 2 or 4 of these global variable positions are used for one of those. This means that if you create a "8-byte" custom global variable like s$Test to the code and recompile, it uses both the 2 free global variable positions in the example above and it changes to this:
CODE
DMA global variable range: $2 - $10937
RAM global variable range: $10938 - $10940
RAM global variables used: $10938 - $10940  (allocated from top)
Free: $0 (0 bytes)    Total: $10940  (43760 bytes)

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#28

Posted 24 January 2005 - 09:14 AM

If any of you have looked for global variables in the SA MB source code, you may have noticed that the arrays in the external scripts looks a bit off. The reason is I forgot to add a function to actually scan both the 'main.scm' and the 'script.img' for arrays. Only the 'main.scm' is scanned. Bummer. lol.gif

Barton Waterduck
  • Barton Waterduck

    retired modder

  • Members
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2002

#29

Posted 25 January 2005 - 10:55 AM

uh.. there may or may not be a 3D script editor out that may or may not support the MB format. Mostly because the MB format changes more often than some people changes their underware. So I was thinking about adding a GTAMA-to-MB source code converter and I would then ofcourse need to write a MB-to-GTAMA converter for it to make any sense at all. Not sure if CyQ has any plans for updating the current format of his new assembler/disassembler for GTA SA. Not sure if I even dare to ask. Me being so scared and all. lol.gif Anyway, I'm just posting.

PatrickW
  • PatrickW

    GTA Juggernaut

  • Inactive Staff
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004
  • Netherlands
  • Best Script 2013 [DYOM]
    Best Script 2012 [DYOM]

#30

Posted 25 January 2005 - 11:25 AM

Barton,

Creating a MB <-> GTAMA converter would really be great, and I'm sure CyQ will be happy to keep you informed on any changes he will make to his format (which are not as frequent as yours tounge.gif )

I feel such a converter could bring the scm modding community closer together, and lets newer people (mostly MB) learn and re-use stuff from the veterans (mostly GTAMA).

Even nicer would be if you make your syntax look more like GTAMA in general, but keep the good and distictive features:
• keep the shorthand notation for math opcodes.
• keep the automatic type ( int/float) detection, or even improve it to solve (var1 = var2)-type situations.
• keep the ARAY functionality in VC, although a more efficient implementation could be made.
• loose the need for those hex-opcodes, by using distinct opcode names (preferably use the GTAMA names)
• restore the order of the parameters to that in the scm-file.


I'm not trying to choose sides here, just trying to bring the community closer together.

PatrickW




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users