Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!   (93,119 visits to this link)

    2. News

    1. GTA Online

      1. Find Lobbies & Players
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Vehicles
      4. Content Creator
      5. Help & Support
    2. Crews

      1. Events
      2. Recruitment
    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA Next

    3. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA Mods
    5. GTA Chinatown Wars

    6. GTA Vice City Stories

    7. GTA Liberty City Stories

    8. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    9. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    10. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA Mods
    11. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    12. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

    2. Red Dead Redemption

    3. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Forum Support

    2. Site Suggestions

Opius

GTA:SA Opcodes

Recommended Posts

PLPynton
set_vehicle_action? That one opcode can do lots of things to the vehicles.

let it be then set_vehicle_action

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein

---

Edited by spaceeinstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
set_vehicle_action? That one opcode can do lots of things to the vehicles.

 

SASCM.ini Update

I just grabbed this for reference. First search was for pickup. Brought me upon 0215 delete_pickup. It was only destroy_pickup for 3 years. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. 032B=7,%7d% = create_weapon_pickup %1o% slot %2d% ammo %3d% at %4d% %5d% %6d% ? It's not a slot at all. It's a type. 3 for one time 14 (GTA3)/15 for recurring, 1 (I think) for sale, etc... Who's taking it upon themselves to rename these when it's not necessary and/or when it leads to misleading information? I wish more people would speak up on this. This is NOT okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein

---

Edited by spaceeinstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton

space, changing destroy into delete for these comands was good.

word "delete" has been in computer language for ages and is pretty clear. destroy "something" concerns applying destruction forces on it rather than removing it from existence.

@Demarest: you should learn not only the new codes (because i can see you are not familiar or you do not even know that 400 fresh ones exist), you should as well learn some new descriptions for them. and you right, i do agree for 032B.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

@Plynton: We were using the destroy descriptions YEARS before you joined here. Not that that matter of course. Just making a point that that's the way it's always been and since it's essentially the same thing, somebody who have to... well let's just say I don't consider this pool of knowledge the property of one person. Neither should anybody considering changing the names to something worse.

 

@space: Some might need updating. Ones that don't, shouldn't. It's ironic that somebody changed destroy to delete, but 035F still says set armor when I revealed a couple years ago that it means increment. The reason why I have to laugh at that is because in the mod I'm working on, I was having an issue I couldn't explain. I couldn't figure it out because the WORDS in from of me said set armor lol.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Y_Less

 

space, changing destroy into delete for these comands was good.

word "delete" has been in computer language for ages and is pretty clear. destroy "something" concerns applying destruction forces on it rather than removing it from existence.

@Demarest: you should learn not only the new codes (because i can see you are not familiar or you do not even know that 400 fresh ones exist), you should as well learn some new descriptions for them. and you right, i do agree for 032B.

You've made it more than known that you don't like the way coding has been done for years, since long before you were around and you've created your own system to counter this, so please don't go trying to twist everyone elses system aswell. If you don't like the descriptions change tham in yours, but don't change them in ours as you never use it (and don't even if you do). Destroy IMHO is better anyway as it's a 'physical' in-game object rather than a code object which would be deleted.

 

And as I've said before why should he and everyone else be forced to learn a new system just because you don't like the way it's always been done and want to be awkward? There's nothing stopping you but don't force it on us, please keep your system to your own releases and your unified opcodes topic, don't force it on others (that includes 'helping' people by changing their code to your system and then correcting, that has never been done between MB/MA/Sanny formats so don't do it now.)

Edited by Y_Less

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
tomworld10

Hi people,

 

 

Let myself introduced into this present topic, I'm drunk (again) but I feel what's happening here is like when Albert Einstein introduced relativity theory (even if it's not as revolutionary as the relativity theory...)!!!!!!!

 

Everything feels different but everything is the way it should be, you AND ME are confused but it's right....

 

 

There is no reason for everyone to change the way they code (even if it's seems too, but I didn't...), because as Pynton said it' easy translate words to the ones you want.

 

And it's really easy to get the differnce between the old way and the new(pynton) way (well I just use two original main.scm).

 

The opcode is the same !!!! as before we'll have to check what the different therories tells us from the same opcode !!!!

 

I don't get why all you old coders are so supprised !!! THE OPCODE IS THE SAME !!!! isn't it ?????

 

Well if you're not sure you'll have to do like a newby and search the web and everything you can to check if it does the sale as it says !!!

 

I think coding a game where "no" (because R* is so nice to us, if anyone of you read this thanks and thanks again, you've done so much !!!!!!!!!, and I'm really so sorry I didn't go as far as you meant us to go....) infos on the game itself (no mission editor and such, as many games now do, many does -and you know it- including an editor) have been realesed (and you know how much this statement is wrong !!! -because so much is explained and/or easy knowing) is so hard that any theory os good....

 

My talks might not make much sens, but Pynton database isn't like cold fusion, it isn't so far from the theories you've made years ago, it's just a new way to think it.

 

I'm probably not the right person to talk about it, because I'm still a new mission coder, that's probably because I'm not afraid of changing everything, but I want to tell you that it's easier for new coders to change than for you guys coding from this GTA that changed our lives (if it didn't what the hell are you -still- doing here ????) which was named III....

 

 

Tomorrow we we'll GTA IV no-one knows what's going to happend when it's going out, maybe me and you will have to go to start again !!!

R* does what they want (even if now they're do more what's giving the money, but they wouldn't be doing San Andreas without this bloody money -and you know better than anyone-) the rules they do follow are the rules that you HAVE TO when you try to make a blockbuster game...

 

 

Anyway I hope you understood me, but remeber how Gallileo Gallile (yeah I'm going far, very far !!!!!) said the Earth was round and no ones believes him....

 

 

But does anyone would debates on his theory if it wasn't so controversal ???

 

So please keep debate, and please keep the way you think until you hve a good reaon to change our mind, so the best way will survive, and then as wikipedia the real ricght thinking swill survive !!!

 

 

Sorry about the off-topic, even if it isn't really off.....

 

 

 

Have fun no matter what you think

Edited by tomworld10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton
space, changing destroy into delete for these comands was good.

word "delete" has been in computer language for ages and is pretty clear. destroy "something" concerns applying destruction forces on it rather than removing it from existence.

@Demarest: you should learn not only the new codes (because i can see you are not familiar or you do not even know that 400 fresh ones exist), you should as well learn some new descriptions for them. and you right, i do agree for 032B.

You've made it more than known that you don't like the way coding has been done for years, since long before you were around and you've created your own system to counter this, so please don't go trying to twist everyone elses system aswell. If you don't like the descriptions change tham in yours, but don't change them in ours as you never use it (and don't even if you do). Destroy IMHO is better anyway as it's a 'physical' in-game object rather than a code object which would be deleted.

 

And as I've said before why should he and everyone else be forced to learn a new system just because you don't like the way it's always been done and want to be awkward? There's nothing stopping you but don't force it on us, please keep your system to your own releases and your unified opcodes topic, don't force it on others (that includes 'helping' people by changing their code to your system and then correcting, that has never been done between MB/MA/Sanny formats so don't do it now.)

i tried to be nice, i tried to be fair but you worthless piece of ... i have to do it.

 

are you stupid or something? do you have problem with you hormonal balance? first of all you going to have to do something with "i am so superior" tone of yours or else this life is going to be hard experience for you, i think as you deserved. then stand as a man. i know exactly how young and stupid can it be, in your age. i know it is hard to understand mature folks. no wonder why you life have already kicked your a.. you might have to rethink what you have done, and because it cannot be undone it is worth to give a shot.

you confuse weakness with kindness, you are no match for me, i am sorry. you are trying to bring me to your level of stupidity and kill me with experience? grow up!

the world does not revolve around you or your clan or whatever it is that turns you on so much.

 

i do not care about opinion of kids like you so do not try to be important for me. you unfortunately have no influence on my decisions what i will or not do.

 

off the record: i have been there when you started to learn coding so do not give me that crap about what was before, before two days before the day after tomorrow... i know how slow you are to understand new things, maybe because you are so fat, i do not know and i am not the one who can help you to conquer your own weakness. you have to help yourself.

 

p.s. when you finally will have a girlfriend (eventually you will end up with one) will you tell her as well:

 

i want to get "sex" as it has been done for years, since long before you were around and you've created your own system...

i bet you do.

 

 

To punish me for my contempt for authority, fate made me an authority myself.

    Albert Einstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

Sorry to edit this with some ONTOPICness, but... I have a question about these opcodes

 

03D3=7,get_route_nearest_for %1d% %2d% %3d% store_to %4d% %5d% %6d% angle %7d%0604=3,get_point %1d% %2d% angle %3d% 06F8=8,find_nearest_route_at %1d% %2d% %3d% in_direction %4h% and_get_route_coord_to %5d% %6d% %7d% angle %8d% 

 

I've hoping to figure out an easy way to tell the game two sets of coords and it give you the z_angle from one to the other. These look like they MIGHT, but what little I tried, didn't seem to perform the way I anticipated. Can anybody shed some light? The way they're worded might mean I've misunderstood them or how they're used. Thanks.

 

 

 

Quoted for preservation. For future reference, when going on a tirade about how somebody should grow up, it helps to lead by example. Hormonal balance? I've found that those that have to resort to personal attacks have nothing to say on the subject itself.

 

It's about unity. Once upon a time, people had to choose between MA and MB. Two languages. True coders could look at either and make it out, but when people are posting code on a forum for example, how can person A help person B if they're talking 2 different languages? Then as time went on, Barton changed the syntax SEVERAL times, effectively releasing new languages. Sanny's here now, etc. And now on top of all that, you wish to change stuff that doesn't need changing? Where does it end? At least when Sanny comes along, it's changes have advantages to justify them. There are TONS of new opcodes, all ripe for the naming. Somebody with RESPECT for the community would make an effort to keep the namind uniform and for the most part, it appears that is has thankfully.

 

Yes it's trivial and yes it's aesthetic, but so is familiarity. Look at original speak for example: 01B4: set_player $PLAYER_CHAR frozen_state 1 (unfrozen) Set frozen state, but 1 is unfrozen? Should've been named player is_free_to_move. But it's easy enough to read that and see what it means. You don't hear new people belly aching over such things. We're human. Mistakes were made.

 

Again though, it comes down to respect. I continue to revere those who came before me and indeed, those who made me. Just as I accept my responsibilty to assist those coming in after me. It takes a LOT of arrogance to feel you can waltz in and change things. Piss in a community's watering hole and what would you expect to happen?

 

Back in the day, one person maintained the database. He WAS uniform and very respectful of the community at large despite being one of the pillars thereof. We should follow in such footsteps. Not abuse his absence by running amok and without useful purpose. If one feels a change should be made, where's the harm in provoking public discussion? I hate to use space as an example because while I know he's done a TON, I wasn't paying much attention when he was, so I could be mistaken both for or against him. I feel very strongly that if one person is willing to make an effort to keep things to the front, they should be afforded some leniancy. At the same time, they should still respect that what they're working with belongs to the public. He has, for the most part, stayed true to that and of course none of us could express our full gratitude. At the same time, I've found tons of errors that are frankly embarrassing. You have to take the good with the bad. But that doesn't mean others can toss their two cents in. If it disturbs you that much, look away.

 

Oh and Y_Less doesn't THINK he's the sh*t. He IS the sh*t. There's nothing wrong with recognizing people for their position in a community. Especially when they've EARNED it. Many of the elite approaches in modern SCM'ing were either his brainchild or something he put forth a great deal into. You don't have to like him if you don't want. But don't try and make it look like he's a nobody with no position to talk on the matter. Apparently, the staff felt he was the primary candidate to LEAD this area. What say you now?

 

Relax, follow your own advice, and grow up. I always tell new people to slow down. This place is huge and old, which means it is well forged. To walk in without such an expectaion is foolish. When in Rome...

 

 

space, changing destroy into delete for these comands was good.

word "delete" has been in computer language for ages and is pretty clear. destroy "something" concerns applying destruction forces on it rather than removing it from existence.

@Demarest: you should learn not only the new codes (because i can see you are not familiar or you do not even know that 400 fresh ones exist), you should as well learn some new descriptions for them. and you right, i do agree for 032B.

You've made it more than known that you don't like the way coding has been done for years, since long before you were around and you've created your own system to counter this, so please don't go trying to twist everyone elses system aswell. If you don't like the descriptions change tham in yours, but don't change them in ours as you never use it (and don't even if you do). Destroy IMHO is better anyway as it's a 'physical' in-game object rather than a code object which would be deleted.

 

And as I've said before why should he and everyone else be forced to learn a new system just because you don't like the way it's always been done and want to be awkward? There's nothing stopping you but don't force it on us, please keep your system to your own releases and your unified opcodes topic, don't force it on others (that includes 'helping' people by changing their code to your system and then correcting, that has never been done between MB/MA/Sanny formats so don't do it now.)

i tried to be nice, i tried to be fair but you worthless piece of ... i have to do it.

 

are you stupid or something? do you have problem with you hormonal balance? first of all you going to have to do something with "i am so superior" tone of yours or else this life is going to be hard experience for you, i think as you deserved. then stand as a man. i know exactly how young and stupid can it be, in your age. i know it is hard to understand mature folks. no wonder why you life have already kicked your a.. you might have to rethink what you have done, and because it cannot be undone it is worth to give a shot.

you confuse weakness with kindness, you are no match for me, i am sorry. you are trying to bring me to your level of stupidity and kill me with experience? grow up!

the world does not revolve around you or your clan or whatever it is that turns you on so much.

 

i do not care about opinion of kids like you so do not try to be important for me. you unfortunately have no influence on my decisions what i will or not do.

 

off the record: i have been there when you started to learn coding so do not give me that crap about what was before, before two days before the day after tomorrow... i know how slow you are to understand new things, maybe because you are so fat, i do not know and i am not the one who can help you to conquer your own weakness. you have to help yourself.

 

p.s. when you finally will have a girlfriend (eventually you will end up with one) will you tell her as well:

 

i want to get "sex" as it has been done for years, since long before you were around and you've created your own system...

i bet you do.

 

 

To punish me for my contempt for authority, fate made me an authority myself.

    Albert Einstein

Edited by Demarest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DexX

There are 24.5 pages of non-ranting here that are useful, so i'm not about to lock this pinned topic. This isn't my area of expertise, but i do know this "discussion" is no longer in within the bounds of this topic. If the debate must continue, atleast take it to a different topic, and let this one retain its purpose, which is the discovery and documentation of new SA opcodes.

 

So, continuing your "discussion" in this topic will not be tolerated, and offenders will be dealt with appropriately including but not limited to verbal warnings and deleted posts. Do not post "But dexx...", any variation therof, or "Apologies"; just drop it.

 

I'll leave it up to Y_Less if he wants to prune the topic or not. The last few posts especially are really out of place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pdescobar

In the most recent SASCM.INI space posted, opcode 0A1F has the following description:

 

0A1F=2,set_stat %1h% max_to %2d% 

 

The name implies both that the stat is set to exactly parameter 2 and also that there is some effect on the stat maximum, but neither of those is true as far as I can tell. Instead it adds the amount of parameter 2 to the current value of the stat, behaving the same as opcode 0624:

 

0624=2,increase_stat %1d% by %2d% ;; floating-point values

 

So I'd like to see 0A1F have the same description, unless someone knows of some difference between the two that I'm missing.

 

 

Also, a more general newbie question. Many of the entries in the INI file have parameters like %1h% however the little explanatory comments at the top don't mention an h% type. So how is h% different than d%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

08FD: toggle_heat_visuals 0/1

 

The effect of what's screen wavering as if the pavement is really hot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigun

^That's nice, we always thought it was only changable via EXE hooking. Your opcode description is alright but the line under it is a bit..un-understandable. You could just say it's the heat haze effect.

Edited by Bigun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ceedj

 

08FD: toggle_heat_visuals  0/1

 

The effect of what's screen wavering as if the pavement is really hot.

I almost hate to waste a post here, but that is an incredible find!

 

This is going into the Studios mod, like NOW.

 

Thanks very much for this one! smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
blush.gif It was an accident. I was stockpiling all unknown toggles to try and find one that would turn off hunger processing. As I tried them ingame, I noticed suddenly their was a haze effect (Bigun wink.gif). I figured I might as well take a minute to isolate it so I can report it. Glad it was of use to somebody. You know, if you appreciate it so much, you could return the favor by finding one that disables hunger processing wink.giflol.gif Just teasing. After my efforts, I'm almost certain their isn't one, unless it's one of the 0 param opcodes confused.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein

SASCM.ini Update

I think everything is back the way it used to be. If there are anything that you want me to change, list them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Zarg

Hi

i have a question

i need to save all the visible damage of a car

and recover the damages later

how can i do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Y_Less

Unless it's a known OpCode you can't. So you'll have to try find it or live with it.

Edited by Y_Less

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
Hi

i have a question

i need to save all the visible damage of a car

and recover the damages later

how can i do that?

I haven't experimented with the opcodes myself, but the INI suggests there are. Why don't you try it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

 

SASCM.ini Update

I think everything is back the way it used to be. If there are anything that you want me to change, list them.

Your line

 

05CA=4,AS_actor %1d% enter_vehicle %2d% passenger_seat %4h% %3d% ms

 

The line SAMB users began with

 

05CA=4,unknown_action_sequence %1d% %2d% %3d% %4h% 

 

Do you see anything wrong? Remember when people were talking about how after they updated their INI, their games would crash? Now why do you suppose that is? Could it be they were using source codes that originally decompiled to 1, 2, 3, 4 but when they went to recompile it, it stacked the data up as 1, 2, 4, 3?

 

user posted image

 

What the f*ck is Big Smoke doing? I don't know, but he looks pretty tore up, doesn't he? Here I am spending 2 hours diagnosing a problem I ASSUMED was a result of my usual trying to pull off some upper level wicked sh*t... When all along it was because at some point in time I unwittingly trusted somebody who SHOULD HAVE known better. Now my Darkpact Level III template is FINALLY understood to be tainted because at whatever point you decided that YOU had the right to take that which was all of ours and make it your own was the same point in time that I had originally fashioned the template.

 

Fast forward to the beginning of TTSA development when I FINALLY learned that it was a bad INI and went back to the roots that WORKED. So now I have a DPLIII template that was with your "updated" INI that now compiles the params in the method it SHOULD HAVE been doing all along. Do you have ANY IDEA how much material I've RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC using that template? Works that I've put out there and said "hey guys, you can count on this the Demarest level of quality you've come to know and trust over the years". I guess I get to spend tomorrow redoing ALL that work and praying I don't miss a spot.

 

So now that I've had to go through ALL THAT, let me ask you this: WHY?

 

WHY?

 

What could you POSSIBLY gain by reordering the params? How many people had made how many source codes before you took it upon yourself to turn it upside down do you suppose? I want to know what you gained from it. I want to know what was so important that now I have to re-evaluate ALL my SA works to make sure I'm not throwing crashes out there. It's great that you guys are eager to make a difference, but the phrase "make a difference" has a positive connotation. Not making things different that REALLY SHOULD stay the same. You want to say actor go to car instead of unkown action sequence, hey! That makes sense! Reordering params does NOT!

 

I am PISSED!

 

[EDIT]

Here is a copy of the original INI. I trust you know what to do with it.

 

@Craig: If you're reading this, NOW you know why I never updated my mirror of the Craig version of SAMB .33 with the new INI.

Edited by Demarest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein
You didn't know that I changed the ordering of the parameters? I've been doing it since the first day I released an updated INI. I think this topic has some complaints of compatibility problems. That's why Pynton created his "universal opcode database". Even with my All In One Mod, I didn't use my own updated INI. I used Barton's old INI because I started out with that file. Why did you just realized it now? Everyone else was cool about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

You didn't know that I changed the ordering of the parameters?
Read the above post and take a guess. How COULD I know? WHY would anybody possibly want to change the order of the parameters when everybody's been using that order before you f*ckED IT UP, which you have no authority to do.

 

 

I've been doing it since the first day I released an updated INI.
On what basis? Who the f*ck do you think you are that you feel YOU can change things that belong to all of us. We're not talking about a text label. We're talking about the components that MB will actually look at and use. Change it around and what do you get? Do you see that picture? Do you want me to again catalogue all the backtracking I've had to do, re-releases etc... Without possibly knowing if the new versions are any better, if X amount of users shyed away from my work because it crashed for them, etc...

 

 

I think this topic has some complaints of compatibility problems.
Gee, I wonder why. Could it be because you CHANGED the way it gets done? There's no compatibility issues when people have the good taste to keep things compatible. The idea is to bridge the gap, not further faction the community. As if YOU have any say in such a thing. I don't know who you think you are, but you're wrong.

 

 

That's why Pynton created his "universal opcode database".
That has nothing to do with this. Near as I can tell, he's only changing the verbiage of them. And when YOU name opcode backwards, perhaps an update of verbiage is needed, so long as it keeps with the general theme we've used for years. But that's a matter of opinion and taste. The matter of FACT on the table is that changing the order of parameters is NOT opinion or taste. YOU do not get a say on the matter. It was released in one particular order and by time YOU chose to f*ck it up (with nothing to gain from it, save to slap your own name on it), there were X users worldwide who already had Y source codes floating about their hard disks with Z releases flying around the internet, being hacked, spliced, and so forth by W amount of people. You change ONE LINE'S parameter order and you risk turning the boat over and dumping everybody. Again, for no gain whatsoever except to slap your own name on it. Not that I understand why ANYBODY would wanted to be credited with the earthquake of the mission coding scene.

 

 

Even with my All In One Mod, I didn't use my own updated INI. I used Barton's old INI because I started out with that file.
That is irrelevant.

 

 

Why did you just realized it now?
Did you read the post? It was because I spent 2 hours diagnosing a problem I was certain was my fault because I'm in the habit of getting into some pretty advanced coding where miscounting a byte could crash the game. Yet in that 2 hours, EVERY test I could run, ever adjustment I could make... everything panned out. So I literally sat down with original code and the code I was using for the mission in question and paged down, one at a time, trying for the life of me to figure out what the hell was going on. Only to find out that YOU sabotaged my work. Again, with absolutely nothing to gain from it. There's nothing to gain from reordering the parameters. NOTHING TO GAIN. YOU need to explain WHY. If it were up to me, you'd be ejected from this community until you fixed it, made a new topic publically announcing the debacle, apologizing for it, and offering up the fixed INI.

 

 

Everyone else was cool about it.
Um, excuse me. You're assuming that ANYBODY knew. You're assuming that there's a reason to initiate that particular change. You're assuming that people knew that you were. You're assuming that they were okay with it. You're assuming that everybody was on board. Well you know what? NOBODY could be okay with it. The keystone that binds us together is bigger than you, me, all of us. It is the heart of the coding community and warping it for the worst only serves to destroy that same community. YOU of all people should know better. And no, everyone else was NOT okay with it. ANYBODY I've spoken to (inbetween going back over ALL my SA work because you SABOTAGED it) also could not make any sense of it.

 

This is really simple. There's NOTHING to gain from changing the very data that MB relies upon. However, there are innumerable pitfalls that would be created from it. A person who have to be REALLY f*cking stupid to even THINK to change such a thing. What were you thinking? And when do you intend to fix it?

 

Since you seem unable to grasp the gravity of your actions, I'll give you ONE isolated example: Rebirth v1 for SA. One of my first SA works. Shortly after one of your earlier INI releases, I used it. I even decompiled the code again as to have the benefit of additional labeling. Which by the way is another problem with changing such a serious item: Everybody would have to decompile everything they have again, obliterating their custom labels, etc. Anyways, so here I am with a f*cked up INI and freshly broken code because of it. But since it was installed when I decompiled the code and still when I recompiled the finished product, the SCM itself was functional. When I released it, I also released the source code because SOME OF US appreciate the community that we serve and opt to help it.

 

PROBLEM 1 - I released the source code. I didn't know it would require a separate INI. So there I was, sending out source code that anybody with the original INI that used it would have shattered code. Look at that picture! YOU did that. And YOU made everybody that would use that ONE source code do that too. Worse than that, anybody that did probably crashed their game and if they were newer, got frustrated to the point that they quit coding altogether. Or if they were a better coder and able to fix their own mistakes, upon finding that after (2 hours perhaps; I know I did) checking it several times nothing's wrong, they probably just assumed MY work was sh*t and hung their hat up over it. After all, Rebirth wasn't a 2 paragraph code snippet, it was a recopy of the entire SCM; far too much to be picking through looking for an indeterminable error that shoul've never been there in the first place.

 

Fast forward to the future and I'm able to isolate that your INI is problematic. I had no way of knowing what/how/why, just that it was problematic and I should stick to the original INI. So I did. Later on down the road, when I first started Mission Passers, the person that was privately reviewing it for me reported that it crashed her game. Upong looking over it multiple times, I had no idea why. After much troublshooting, I came to realize that the code I was using for "original" code was in fact not. Stupid me actually believed that I was a dunce for making the most basic of mistakes. When in fact it was just that my files had been sabotaged by you. Again, I didn't realize this at the time but was incredibly fortunate enough to have a REAL source code handy and was able to move forward, kicking myself as if I was to blame at all for any of that.

 

Fast forward a little more and the difference between v1 and v2 SCM is understood and the transition should be a fairly easy one. Demand increases for my compatibility work--which nobody else is doing at the moment by the way and since the primary application is tools that a lot of people benefit from, it's kind of important--to take on v2 counterparts, so I oblige as the process is SUPPOSED TO BE as simlpe as nixing 4 lines. So I pull out the dusty old Rebirth v1 source code, chop the four lines, compile it, repackage the download, update the webpage, announce the re-release, etc. Only when I compiled it (source that was made with YOUR f*cked up INI), I had the original INI in place. So again, what should've been perfectly good code was severly botched. But worse that that, it got packaged with a SCM that wasn't botched. A functional v1 SCM and a botched v2 SCM. Which means no matter which INI ANY user has trying to use the code for anything at all will cause THEM to wrap up crashing code, etc.

 

Now I'm just one person. And that's just one of my projects. The storyline of which is about a year's time now. Look at all the trouble that was caused. Which of course resonates and is multiplied as different people use it, reuse it, etc. ALL THAT TROUBLE, and not ONE SINGLE ITEM to be gained. There's NOTHING to be gained from swithing the params around. So with nothing to gain, there should be no temptation for anybody to make such a change. Which indicates to me that either you maliciously set out to sink the coding community or you were SO desperate to get pats on the back, kudos, what have you that while making what could've been fantastic progress, you were so zealous to "improve things" that you did the worst thing you could possibly have done. THE worst. There's not one thing anybody could do to ravage the coding community worse. Even R* re-releasing the game with efforts sewn in to prevent modding hasn't caused as much trouble as this has the potential to have.

 

Fix it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ceedj

This REALLY should have been handled in a PM. I came here hoping for a new opcode. Please continue this elsewhere, kthanks. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
This REALLY should have been handled in a PM. I came here hoping for a new opcode. Please continue this elsewhere, kthanks. smile.gif

Excuse you, but space here has taken it upon himself to damage the entire community. This is an entire community issue. It impacts the entire community. Since space never bothered to notify the entire community, I am. Something that stands to send the entire community into a screeching halt. Maybe space sees fit to damage the entire community, but I cannot. Which is what remaining silent would be doing. I've been at this for a little while. I know how to send a PM when a PM's what's called for, thanks. Here, it's not. If you don't trust me for that, then read the above. It effects the entire community. Or at least those of us who rely on coding tools that use such INI's sneaky2.gif

 

If you're really so empassioned about the entire community remaining in the dark that the files they've come to rely on will only sabotage anything they could use them for, which includes unsuspecting users of mods that unsuspecting authors released under the belief that they were operational, then by all means contact staff. Why, I linked an Admin to this just last night and he didn't seem to mind. If you really are that hellbent on sheltering the factioning of the community and choose to involve a staffer, have the good taste to select one that knows something about coding so that they might actually be capable of grasping the damage that's been done. Fair enough?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ceedj

Ok man, chill. Really. It's a GAME, not the friggin' apocolypse. I was just saying that I'm always happy to see new posts in the opcode thread because there could be, you know, a new opcode!

 

That's all. Relax. Take some deep breaths. Or Somas. Or whatever. mercie_blink.gif

 

On a semi-related side note, you've given me a new idea for the end of our second season, so thanks for that. smile.gif

 

PS: I knew about the parameter switching and I don't even USE MB. I can't be the only one that knows about this. I'm not saying I agree with it, but it wasn't unknown to me. And I really don't think space was trying to intentionally "sabatoge" anything; he's found plenty of very useful opcodes (at least they are useful to me) and has always been helpful around the forums. Just my own $0.02.

Edited by ceedj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

Ok man, chill. Really. It's a GAME, not the friggin' apocolypse.
You realize you're posting in the mission coding section, right? HERE, what has happened is the worst thing that could happen.

 

 

I was just saying that I'm always happy to see new posts in the opcode thread because there could be, you know, a new opcode!
space is welcome to make a fresh thread stating that he acknowledges the error he's made and intends to fix it.

 

 

That's all. Relax. Take some deep breaths. Or Somas. Or whatever.  mercie_blink.gif
You assume too much. Pretend for a moment that PEDS was meant to be something people could use, reuse, adapt, re-release etc. And that something someybody else did... that they shouldn't have done... that they had no reason to do caused all your work of the last year to be defunct which not only sets you back, but has caused innumerable complications for not only all your users and all their users, but anybody else using it. YOU would be upset. And if that ever happens, I'll toss you a kick to the ribs just to see how you like being told to chill when you have every right to be upset. I can't speak for other coders, but this one bit ME pretty hard.

 

 

On a semi-related side note, you've given me a new idea for the end of our second season, so thanks for that. smile.gif
With all your chill nonsense, I'm quite certain that that's a less than complimentary statement. I'll settle for credit for the heatwave opcode and money stacks.

 

 

PS: I knew about the parameter switching and I don't even USE MB.
Put the two together and you have a fine recipe for the inability to grasp the situation. If you don't understand what's being talked about, feel free to say so. Or not post until a more familiar topic comes up.

 

 

And I really don't think space was trying to intentionally "sabatoge" anything; he's found plenty of very useful opcodes (at least they are useful to me) and has always been helpful around the forums.
I agree with everything in that quote. Which is why I'm additionally mesmerized that somebody would change something just for the credit of it. He's done tons for discovery and labeling. That's doesn't mean he did NOT screw us all by propogating who knows how many different INI's. It doesn't mean he's free to reinvent what 0 and 1 means in computer languages. And I don't mean to come off like I want the guy for an enemy. But a fix is needed and it is needed a year ago give or take. Until then, I will ride him like a pony. And if I presumed myself to be capable of taking that which belongs to everybody and making it my own, I'd expect the same reaction. Barton's gone. CyQ's gone. TbM2k is gone... If we don't stick together, we will wither away. Don't think for a moment that the community would not be more proliferous right now if new coders didn't experience crashes that make no sense to them as a direct result of encountering some of these very discrepencies. And to think that I helped perpetuate that my mirroring his "updated" INI's cry.gif There is no way to guage the damage done, but it IS pretty obvious it should've never happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pdescobar

The problem here is that the cat's out of the bag. For example, the different parameter order of 05CA is not new; every INI version I have uses the 1-2-4-3 order and the earliest is Sanny's default which is dated 25-Nov-2005. Going back to the original order would break every piece of code I've written. Yes, changing parameter order is something that shouldn't be done unless absolutely necessary, but "fixing" it by going back can do just as much damage if the change has been in place for some time.

 

As far as I understand, Space takes it upon himself to keep his INI updated and release it to the community for us to use if we choose; I see it as my responsibility to decide which of those updates I need and which I don't. For example, when I incorporated the 10-Sept-2006 INI into my own version (which has personal naming/comment changes), I did not change opcodes 00A3, 00A4, 00B1, 00B2, 00EC-00F1, 0129, 0570, 05A8, 0656, 071E, 0888, and 0964 because of parameter differences. Instead, I updated descriptions where necessary but kept the old order and noted those differences in a comment at the top of the file for reference. It would be great if parameter orders were always constant, but I recognize that they aren't and so I won't simply drop in a new INI from space (or anyone else) unless I check it to ensure it won't cause me any problems.

 

At this point there is simply no coding standard for SA. The two major compilers not only have different syntax, but their INI files don't match either (example: $ON_MISSION vs $ONMISSION). Nowadays, all source code should include both the vars.ini/variables.ini and the SASCM.ini which were used when the code was created for it to be useful.

 

However, I do agree that communication of the actual changes should be greatly improved. Currently, when an INI update is released, I have to run a diff against the previous version to see what has changed and whether or not it will cause a problem. If all INI updates contained even a simple note like "opcodes X, Y and Z have updated descriptions; opcodes Q and R have parameter changes" then you would know immediately what things might be problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein
Man, if you want me to stop updating the INI, I'll stop updating it. Just say it and I'll just leave it alone. You don't even have to use the file. No need to bash me like that. I was just trying to help. I thought rearranging the parameters can make certain opcodes more easy to understand. If you want me to make "your" version of the file without moving any parameters, I would do it. Edited by spaceeinstein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigun

Dem, I can speak for myself I knew about the switching params order makes the old code "incompatible". I'm surprised you didn't know about it until now, but that's no reason to b*tch at Space like that. There IS something to gain from changing the parameter order, the opcode is easier to understand. That aside, WHAT is there to gain by b*tching at Space...? You could calmly explain your situation possibly in a PM and ask him to make an INI version without changed ordering. It's a little messy, but he does say in the readme that comes with the INI "This file should be used for reference only." He didn't use it himself. I know I used it for reference only. Sure, it's in the SASCM.INI format, so if you want to use it you can, plain and simple. It isn't Space's fault the consequences of that slipped past you.

 

Do you see anything wrong? Remember when people were talking about how after they updated their INI, their games would crash? Now why do you suppose that is? Could it be they were using source codes that originally decompiled to 1, 2, 3, 4 but when they went to recompile it, it stacked the data up as 1, 2, 4, 3?

I already knew about that around the first INI release. It was stated (somewhere...) or otherwise I wouldn't. Again, you keep saying it's a community-wide issue. If so, why hasn't anybody posted bitching around like you? I don't get it. So nobody noticed the incompabillity in the whole community, just you? I am aware that you are indeed superior to a lot of coders, but I remember using Space's INI for reference when I was just beginning coding and I got past the INI incompabillity. My game crashed because I happened to copy the INI line of one of the changed ordering opcodes so I can have the description in (in a lazy manner). Plugging some simple text opcodes to debug/check where the code crashed narrowed down to that opcode. So I opened my original, used INI and saw that the order was different. I just twisted two parameters in my code line and it worked. And that was my mistake copying from the updated INI, BTW, because I got used of doing it for the opcodes that had original ordering. I don't think this is as much of a problem you're making of it. There's also an INI code converter, I haven't used it but I assume it works and it may help you. So please calm down, Space said above he will make you an INI with original ordering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.