Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    1. GTA Online

      1. Los Santos Summer Special
      2. The Diamond Casino Heist
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

    2. GTA 6

      1. St Andrews Cathedral
    3. GTA V

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

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA Chinatown Wars

    6. GTA Vice City Stories

    7. GTA Liberty City Stories

    8. GTA San Andreas

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

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

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

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

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

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

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

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

    1. Announcements

    2. Support

    3. Suggestions

Opius

GTA:SA Opcodes

Recommended Posts

Demarest

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.
That doesn't make it right. I don't know when you entered the scene, but I know everything you just said came AFTER the release of SAMB. Which means that at the point in time whomever is responsible first rearranged the params, there were already any number of peple, files, releases, etc that used the one order. For the sake of the community, it's preservation, and its potential for productivity, it needed then just as it needs now uniformity. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter which is more widespread, etc. For example, Craig and I are the only two sources I know of for an SAMB that actually works on the PC. Craig saw fit to include updated INI's. Me being the purist that I am felt it was more respectful to Barton and anybody downloading it to preserve its original release form and give people the option. It wasn't that I didn't trust space, it's that I wanted to preserve the way things were done. The irony awas that my caution was meant to be that in the event of something getting screwed up, I wouldn't be involved. The point I'm getting at is that which came first has to be held as the right answer. It holds true to the FACT that nobody had any business changing it, there's nothing to gain by changing it, and the fact that an unkown amount of users, files, etc started off as that way, you cannot punish them for any reason. For anybody to make it to where the warped INI is all you've had access to, they are punishing YOU. Now if you were to say as I hear you saying that the amount of the punished now outweighs those who didn't get punished and therefore the punished way is right is to now consiously say that they too now must be punished. I'm sorry, but I disagree. When I first joined this community, my member title was "aspiring great". I knew my convictions, my talents, and my love for the game. I knew I would rise to the level of the elite that came before me. At no time however TO THIS DAY do I disrespect anybody or anyTHING (this means the way things get done). Now you cannot require respect, but anybody proposing to do such a noble and selfless act such as keeping the INI updated has a responsibility to EACH AND EVERY person they serve in doing so by keeping it noble and selfless. This includes not intentionally introducing errors when there is no reason to do so and nothing to gain in doing so.

 

 

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.
That is unfortunate. Short term sacrifice, long term gain is something I've always said. Uniformity to the most attainable goal possible and those who remained true to the roots should not now be punished just because they are in the minority. Remember: Changing the order is a decision; not changing them is an instinct wink.gif

 

 

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 don't see it the same way. At first I did, but then it sort of just came to be. Those who were in charge of keeping the INI/opcodes centralized disappeared and left us with the task of doing it ourselves. Nobody seemed to be doing it except space and he continued to do so. He essentially came by default the keeper of the INI. An awesome task and responsibility. Done correctly it is worth a great deal of public adoration and appreciation. Therein lies my confusion as to why anybody would abuse that. I've outlined a few times how the process of elimination dictates that it was done to receive further credit. But to be the sole keeper/updated of the INI already commands an awesome amount of respect. Why would anybody jeopardize that in doing something counterproductive at all?

 

 

I see it as my responsibility to decide which of those updates I need and which I don't.
It shouldn't be that way. What good is an INI that cannot be used? In my world, the possibilities of leaving traditional naming and/or reordering parameters do not even exist. Why for a moment would I anticipate that anybody who SHOULD know better would ever propose to violate either? Unfortunately, we're not talking abou him taking the naming scheme as his own, which is unfortunate. Or even the way he's named quite a few as if 0 means on and 1 means off (which has never been; you know this). No, what we're talking about is changing the ONE THING that MB actually responds to. To reorder it guarantees problems and there's no way of knowing how deep the problems run. I DO know however that Big Smoke doesn't seem to keen in occupying seat 10000 of his Perennial in a matter of 0 ms. Do you suppose anybody deserves to have to sit troubleshooting their work for hours as if THEY somehow screwed up? That's the first part of the first mission. Don't think for a moment that numerous coders and sadly, non-coding mod users haven't hit that same brick wall for almost a year now. Coders have already had to face the achilles heel of savegame compatiibility. We don't need MORE reasons for new would be coders to be discouraged to the point of quitting. Nor do we need users switching to a map/car mod only mentality just because the coding scene has proven to be more volatile than it's worth. In the good old days, we were able to teach people who knew nothing of SCM how to impliment script mods. The advent of the script.img has not made the process any easier. We don't need to further complicate things by guaranteeing that even the appropriate implimentation will crash the game first thing. Going back to your quote, it IS a person's choice. Maybe they like 1 = 2 instead of 1 I have a mouse in my pants 2. That's a matter of taste. Param order is NOT a matter of taste. It was a certain way and the tools we use expect them to be. And they should be.

 

 

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.
Again, doesn't make it right. We cannot as coders just say "I recognize that they aren't". We NEED to stick together which means we NEED our files to match as much as possible. There's primarily MB and Sanny at this point. Different syntax for different tools, while not necessarily necessary, is understandable. There is NO reason why they could/should be different. Reminds me back when I only coded for GTA3 and SeBsZ (who knew nothing of coding back then) took it upon himself to convert my codes to VC. Well with the new platform, some commands were changed in terms of param order. Which is wrong, but at least has the protection of somebody NOT screwing code up because of the order difference... until somebody goes to convert work from the other game. THAT is almost to be expected. We have NO REASON to expect one day for things to be one way and the next day another. Nothing is gained, so nobody should ever consider doing so. And if they do, we are not to stand by and say, "Oh, we have a rogue coder AT THE HELM?... meh" That's the time to stand up and say, "Look, I don't know who you think you are, but this belongs to all of us." It IS bigger than any of us or even all of us. Because once we release our work, it's out there. There's no controlling what's done with it. We already have to face the woes of savegame compatiblity. We don't need to in addition ensure that there be a million different compiler configurations when one works perfectly fine and therefore should've never been sabotaged.

 

 

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).
How did this come to be? I agree that Barton or whomever changed it should've never changed from the $ONMISSION we've used for years to $ON_MISSION. However, it ended up that way and as a result, it's just what every SA coder ended up with. Which means if Sanny comes along later, they should strive for uniformity as much as possible. Granted, we're talking about taste more than anything. But you know what? If Sanny comes along and has a totally different parameter order... THEY CAN DO THAT! They don't have to risk X number of users and works floating about with a different order because when they first hit the scene, there were NO users/works floating about with their syntax as it was. You could devil's advocate by saying "Well what about people converting code?" Well they already have to convert between @2 and #2 or however it's done. Having to reorder parameters on top of it would be a pain, but the same pain changing syntax would be. It's new so those wishing to bridge the gap already have the unavoidable task of having to go through line by line and convert things. Meanwhile, when this "update" was first proposed, there WERE already an immeasureable amount of codes and users already in motion with the original params order and therefore params order for that tool needs to be maintained. We all use if player defined even though not doing so appears to have no effect. Why do we do that? Because our job as author includes making our best effort to release that which will not under any circumstances crash; a realistic goal. For any one of us to screw the rest by sabotaging the params order is taking even the best of coder and FORCING him to release crash-y works. Maybe you're okay with that, but I'll be damned if my work is compomised by others. Having woken up from this nightmare, I had my share of work to do to bring things I had released as operational almost a year ago. And realistically, EVERYBODY would. This is not something to sit still about.

 

 

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.
notify.gif It was NEVER that way. Why should we accept that now? We are much fewer in number than those who would use our work. And no offense to our users, but it takes a greater degree of intelligence to be able to craft this work than it does to use it. Our lesser and more intelligent ranks should've stuck together from day one so that the calm the greater, less capable numbers of our users could be preserved. I'm sorry I didn't know about this sooner, but those who did should not have allowed such factioning to take place. I hate to pick on Pynton because he's not at all the issue here, but he recently released a work as text in MB-speak that had $PLAYER instead of $PLAYER_CHAR and $SCPLAYER instead of $PLAYER_ACTOR. WHY? What does that gain? Even if it hasn't been _CHAR and _ACTOR for years, in terms of SA, it has been from the beginning. Why would anybody willfully change it, thus requiring a variables.ini when not making the change that gains nothing in making it when instead you can just call it what it is and permit your would be users to have a trouble-free implimentation? He even went so far as to not even mention that a variables.ini would be needed. He just put it out there, guaranteeing that anybody interested WOULD crash their game. It's another subject altogether, but it's indicative of the same spirit. We HAVE to stick together and if a few would rather drag EVERYBODY down instead of falling in line, they need to be made to fall in line or if rogue is there choice, to carry it out outside of OUR community. Yours, mine, all of ours. No one person is authorized to make changes that WILL crash codes.

 

 

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.
I understand what you're saying and I still disagree with you. I know what it is to undertake such a large project. To in addition to everything, be required to document it all, is an unrealistic expectation. Sure it would be nice, but assuming the changes you're making are cosmetic for the sake of pulling back the veil of the unkown, what has and has not changed is largely irrelevant. It is far more important that the file just IS operational. What you're saying not only provides for factioning, but requires it to be as complex as possible. Whereas making cosmetic changes only and not documenting the changes might not be the most desireable method, but at least it doesn't stand to break anything and everything you do with it in half.

 

 

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.
Except that NONE OF US have the right to make parameter changes. As I told Y_Less, if as an unkown, we have opcode: 1,2 and once we realize what the opcode does, we're left with 1 god this is totally bass ackwards 2, it would be unfortunate. However, nowhere near as unfortunate as it would be to split the community in half and again for each and every follow up INI with param shifts. Read the progression of events that led me to release a ZIP that was supposed to contain 1 SCM for v1 and v2 SA users. Against my will, it was 2 different version, one guaranteed to crash regardless of what INI you're using. Nothing you could say; nothing anybody could DO would ever justify that. We're supposed to be smart guys here. How else can we train ourselves to think in terms of JF when the human mind thinks in terms of JT? And be able to add mulitple conditionals to it, some NOT'ed, some OR'ed etc. If we cannot read 1 jesus christ what the f*ck does this say 2, then maybe we shouldn't be coding. However, MB is the one that takes the sh*t we give it and prepares it for the engine to use. So it is very important that MB is putting things in the right order yesterday, today, and tomorrow. This is not a matter of opinion.

 

 

Man, if you want me to stop updating the INI, I'll stop updating it.
If I want you to stop updating it, I'll say stop updating it. Not that I have any authority to do so. But is that what I'm saying? NO! I've said in the past to stop naming opcodes backwards. And I'm saying now to stop screwing over the community. I've already linked you to the original INI. You should convert the one you keep spitting out to that standard. You should create a topic announcing that this has taken place, that it's claimed countless victims, that the fix will unfortunately claim even more, but this is what we need for uniformity's sake, and release the fixed INI. Your INI work is GOOD WORK. It's useful if not necessary. And therefore very important that it works. What good is an INI that nobody can use? When I code now, I have to use the original INI because it was all that worked (wasn't until now that I knew why) while I keep your INI open for reference. Wouldn't it be easier if a person could just use code that was already correct AND updated in description?

 

 

Just say it and I'll just leave it alone.
It's so far beyond where it should be in terms of parameter shifting that to leave it alone now would be catastrophic. Instead of throwing a tantrum, take your medicine, accept that you made an error in judgement, and make ammends for it. I HAVE a great deal of respect AND ADMIRATION for you for choosing to take on this project that you have. But it needs to be done right, okay? It was wrong of you to ever shift the params. You need not take it personally as this applies to everybody. You made a mistake and now there's consequences you need to face. It's unfortunate, but you brought it upon yourself. I'm not a man of grudges, nor do I believe they are any good for anybody, let alone a group of guys that SHOULD be closely knit as we're the few making this sh*t work. You and I and all of us need to stand together and that includes keeping the INI in the form that it was originally so that EVERYBODY can enjoy maximum compatibility.

 

 

You don't even have to use the file.
Nobody choosing to should unwittingly be FORCED to release works that WILL crash games. Maybe you didn't read what I wrote, but when I released Rebirth, I released its source as well. Source that was inline with your manipulations, so anybody using the original INI would be compiling AGAINST THEIR WILL AND KNOWLEDGE code that WILL crash. As I stated, I spent 2 hours running test on Windshield's first infusion into the DPLIII template. Everything checked out. It's at that point that many lesser coders would give up. Instead, I chose to take on the extremely dull task of paging down and comparing code line for line, page by page. After all, it's "just code". It's the sum of its parts. The answer is out there should I choose to find it. And when I did, I was not pleased at all to find that all my time and all my effort went down the drain because SOMEBODY ELSE did something that not only should they never have done, but they didn't have the authority to do. If you want to take 1,2 and change it to 1 now we know it does this 2, GREAT! Thank you very much with as much sincerity as I can offer to you! The moment you say 2 we know this now and it looks better to us humans, who are not the ones piecing it back together 1, you've just f*cked an entire community, all that would use the works of that community, every work those people would release, all of THEIR users... there's no guaging the extent of the damage. No one person has this right. Least of all for the reason because it's easier to read. It might not make much sense to go from if 1 conditional 1 NOT conditional 2 jf label to if 21 NOT conditional 1 conditional 2 jf label, but that's what it takes to flip a multi-conditional if. And since we're smart guys, we know ths even if on the surface it's confusing as hell. I think we're capabe of reading 1 store to 2 instead of shattering the existing community with our "pretty" 2 = 1 bullsh*t.

 

 

No need to bash me like that.
I'm not bashing YOU. I'm bashing the person who felt they had the authority to take that which belonged to all of us and make it theirs. I'm "bashing" the person who f*cked me in the ass and forced me to f*ck any number of people that count on me for quality work up the ass. If that's you, rather than whining that your damaging, UNCALLED FOR actions caused damage, it's time to face the damage such an action carries and move FORWARD by fixing it. I think the fact that pdescobar points out and understandably so that the fix is every bit as damaging as the damage should indicate how wrong it was for you or ANYBODY to make such changes. But it needs to be done. Do that, and two months from now we'll all be hand in hand, TRYING to perpetuate the knowledge of what the damage was and how to avoid it so that those who would later arrive on the scene and unsuspectingly get sucked into the undertow will no longer be taking that risk as none of us authorized you to subject us to.

 

 

I was just trying to help.
I know and that's appreciated beyond expression. But there's a right way and a wrong way. To name an opcode in a way that makes 0 on and 1 off just makes you look foolish on that one point. No biggie. When you shift parameters around, you're GUARANTEEING crashes. That's not helping, okay?

 

 

I thought rearranging the parameters can make certain opcodes more easy to understand.
Well I hope I've fulfilled my duties in explaining that a) we're writing for MB and it needs to know what we're doing and b) we're smart guys. If it takes a dozen of us reading that (not really) not so legible 1 store to 2 to prevent 100 people from bathing in code that will crash their game, it's what we need to do.

 

 

If you want me to make "your" version of the file without moving any parameters, I would do it.
It pisses me off just as much that you have this wanton attitude as it does that you did when you initially made the mistake. If you were standing right here, I'd grab you by the ear, pull you close and say once again so that maybe you'll get it: This isn't MY version. It's not YOUR version. It doesn't belong to any of us. It belong to ALL of us. Which is why YOU--one person--have no right to change it in a manner that is going to f*ck it up. It is a growing entity. Chopping it's head off and shoving it up its ass because it looks better to YOU does nothing for the entity that has always had its head on its neck and any number of people are used to seeing and USING it that way. Okay? Yes, I would like for you to fix it back. And while it might be a little ego-bruising, I think you need to make an announcement, edit posts in this thread... whatever it takes to ensure that people who choose to get into SA coding by way of SAMB after this run NO RISK of ever having to trip over this sad chapter in our history. 3 years ago, I updated the INI for MB 4.7 for GTA3. I included all the math opcodes for local vars that were omitted simply because they didn't exist in the original game as well as added in support for the sin/cosine opcodes and other such changes. And since I made those updates in keeping with the patterns those before me established, here we are 3 years later and not a single complaint ever. And useability aside, I think it's the respectful thing to do to keep with those that came before me. Were it not for people like CyQ and Barton, I never woudl've been able to do any of the things I've done. I owe it to them and you do too.

 

Now I apologize if you feel I'm being harsh, but I assure you that there was nothing gentle about finding out that after days of chasing the ghost of upper locals in MAIN (no blame) only to find it was in fact a ghost, after months of releasing various works that were assumed to work, and after hours of troubleshooting what was assumed to be fault code (game crashes; what would YOU think?) that it was not only SOMEBODY else, but somebody else doing something that they shouldn't have. You were trying to help and I grasp this. But you were essentially sh*tting in the pool we all drink from and that strikes me as both arrogant and discourteous. I long for this to be in the past as much as you do. I hope you have the enough integrity and dignity to make it right if only to spare your own name from this dark association. What others do with it is up to them, but it's a choice none of us should've ever had to make and that's what you've done to us. The sooner the fix is in place and explained to the whole of the community, the sooner the damage can be halted and the slow healing process may set in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton

exactly! i see that it is more clear for all of us why the ORIGINAL ORDER was the best. please ppl talk more. i am sure in some time you will realize that the time has come to change it back.

xmas.gif

Edited by PLPynton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

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
Why is it such a surprise? It's not the kind of thing ANYBODY should have to provide for. I had no reason to suspect any of us would have the audacity to even consider such an action.

 

 

but that's no reason to b*tch at Space like that.
Let me f*ck up all your work for the last year and see how you feel about me. With all do respect, I'm in a position in the community that when I put something out there and say "Hey guys, this isn't a mod, it's a tool that will fix this, do this etc" and it doesn't work, I REALLY look bad. Something I don't mind when I'm the one making mistakes. It happens and I accept it. But I would never perceive myself important enough to be able to trip you. And if I did, you would be upset with me and understandibly so. Only he didn't just f*ck me. He didn't just f*ck all my users. He's f*cked the entire community for no reason whatsoever.

 

 

There IS something to gain from changing the parameter order, the opcode is easier to understand.
And while cognitively challenged are enjoying less calories being burned, all codes worlwide from day one start crashing, the ripple of which is immesurable. Good idea sarcasm.gif I don't know what you've created and/or released, but take it from me when I say that SCM'ing can be fairly complex, especially when you consider it forces people to start a new game. Not a lot of allure for those who know nothing about SCM'ing, but would like to enjoy a cool mod. Sure we could always just release entire SCM's which is not only bloated files, but locks people out from customizing, combining, etc. I, for one, would prefer to make it as easy as possible for people to use. Why? Because I APPRECIATE how intimidating such things can be to those not in the know. Which is why things like Darkpact are documented in a way that anybody can use. The idea is to put it in MORE peoples' hands, not lock them out of it. Now we can't just say put a create_thread in with the others and paste this code just before mission 0. Now we have to say make sure your IMG file is here and make sure you have this INI and you have that INI or got it before this date, you'll need to now do this instead blah blah blah.

 

Maybe you don't see it, but we're not talking about 2 INI's. Like original and space's. We're talking about original, the first space one with X param shifts, the second space one with Y more param shifts... stop right theres. I don't even need to provide for all other subsequent releases. Just consider the releasing of the 3rd here. If params were preserved, there's NO issues. No issues in the 2nd, 3rd, 218th... HIGHLY scalable. In this scenario however, the release of the third would mean that users would have to update. Or if they wanted to use mod X, they have to grab that INI. Or if they'd like to use mod Y, they need to grab THAT INI. When I released Rebirth a year ago, it was made using an updated INI. It was an entire SCM; as in ALL of original code plus one thread and any numer of create_threads calling upon it. I released the source for it. Which INI works with it? You don't know, do you? Hell, I don't know. So anybody using it has a 217 in 218 chance of making code that crashes. Is anybody f*cking home? You keep the params where they are. I don't care if it enacts medusa and you turn to stone. Doing so means that anybody anywhere can jump in at any point in time use any code with any file and pull it off without a hitch. Maybe YOU like f*cking people, but without a hitch sounds pretty damn spiffy to me.

 

 

That aside, WHAT is there to gain by b*tching at Space...?
What was there to gain by him nuking my work of a year? Attack the f*cking source, not the person who says "goddamnit" when they stub their toe. A change is in order and I plan on driving home exactly how important it was. And if he continues this woe is me acts, I'll continue to drive home how heinous an act he's committed. People have a right to know that they're playing with a time bomb.

 

 

You could calmly explain your situation possibly in a PM
f*ck PM's. Stop saying that sh*t. Was he so subtle when he turned the entire community on its head? People have a right to know.

 

 

ask him to make an INI version without changed ordering.
I shouldn't have to. Changing their order is a decision, not changing them is an instinct. There was even a point when people were complaining about crashes and yet here he is defending his actions.

 

 

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."
Well the versions I had before I learned it was bad news didn't. Besides, what's the use in that? If you as an individual get off your high horse and don't preserve for a moment that you deserve to be able to assf*ck the entire community and just name them... LOOKEE THERE! A file everybody can use, don't have to, etc... But nobody crashes? At least not as a result of your arrogance. Reference only? When I'm done being jerked off, I prefer having a release, nahmeen? Had he bothered to keep in line with those before him, we could write 1 na na naboo boo 2 and it would work.

 

 

It isn't Space's fault the consequences of that slipped past you.
Yes, it is. NOBODY has the right to make the code of another not work. Period. You don't hand out grenades to a nursery school, tell them they don't have to pull the pin, and then expect to be able to walk away blame free when the room goes up in flames. Had he (read: ONE PERSON) not shifted the params, ANYBODY could use it. Do you know what the world's population is? Somehow one person behaving themselves so that anybody in contact with their actions are safe don't strike me as an unrealistic expectation.

 

 

If so, why hasn't anybody posted bitching around like you?
Lack of appreciation for the community? Lack of appreciation for our users? Lack of aspiration for the most user-friendly experience possible? Why don't you ask OTHER PEOPLE why OTHER PEOPLE behave a ceratin way. How can I answer for the actions of others. Here, let me try it this way: I'm Demarest. If I can get bitten by this, most anybody can. Why would you WANT that??! ONE PERSON has the good taste to not stand out of line and suddenly NOBODY can get bitten. This isn't a conversation.

 

 

So nobody noticed the incompabillity in the whole community, just you?
Well sadly, SCM'ing is intimidating. YOU don't know how many new coders tried their hand at the simplest of tasks and failed and walked away because it struck them as too daunting to be worthwhile. What if somebody downloaded my Rebirth source and wanted to give themselves 40 seconds instead of 30. So they change 30000 to 40000 and recompile... yet anytime they play the game, it crashes. How can you advocate such a thing? If he's bothering to rename them all and release them in a format the MB can use, what does it hurt to keep the params where they are? I don't know of a SINGLE CODER that would read 1 store to 2 for example and their brain shut down. I DO however know of hundreds of people that come in and say "hey guys, I'd like to mod. where do I begin?" Moron. You think this person will be able to work out a slide rule using some f*cked up formula that says if you're downloading this mod, you have to do this, if you're using this code, you'll need that... Or do you suppose a simple point and click do this here and this here, what files you do or do not have matters not? I'm not at all impressed that you would advocate such division. But guess what? It's not yours to divide! lol.gif Thank GOD! You want to know why it bothers me? Name one coder that posts here with any regularity that's been here longer than me. *crickets chirp* I've seen the way it gets done. I know how it gets done. And the way it gets done is the way it gets done and YOU cannot change that, space cannot change that and I'm not impressed by anybody that would WANT to f*ck the entire community.

 

 

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.
I hear you. And now that I know, I will too. For you to say that means you miss the point altogether. Maybe you weren't around then, but there was a time when NOBODY had to think like that. And nobody should have to. SA now has an IMG, arrays... those just getting into coding have a daunting task. Worse than that, ye olde check original code fails more than ever because a) the code is larger and more complex than ever before and b) the opcode set more than doubled in size, most of which are unbeknownst to us. The last thing anybody needs is to also have to consider which INI is loaded, make sure they changed it for this work and again for this one... That's NOT how it gets done and it takes a level of disregard for this established community to think for a moment that it's okay for you to introduce such confusion. Take 05CA for instance, the f*ckup that turned me on to this atrocity. What do you gain by saying seat 4 3 ms instead of 3 ms in seat 4? NOTHING. YOU GAIN NOTHING. However, ANYBODY using that code WILL crash their game. Feel free to confer with Mr. Smoke's recent attempt at occupying seat 10000 in 0 ms if you doubt me for a moment. Nothing to gain, everything to lose. Not everything to lose for me; for me, you, people that grab my sh*t, people that grab your sh*t, people that mod anybody's sh*t, releases any sh*t, etc. Nothing to gain everything to lose. That's not what we call a wise decision. I'm appalled at anybody and everybody that would advocate something that gains nothing and destroys everything. Frankly, anybody that feels that way scares me with their disregard for others.

 

 

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).
Well there you go. Had space had the good taste to stay in line with the work of those that came before him, that's ONE crash that shouldn't have happened. What if you didn't catch it though? What if you released it? What if others used it? You would actually defend the actions of somebody that had nothing to gain and all that to lose? There's no excuse. It's wrong. To change it is a decision, to not change it is an instinct. I keep saying that because it denotes the amount of effort it takes to f*ck us. It was chosen. Maybe not to f*ck us, but any one of us could see on our own before getting a crash how reordering params would cause a problem and would therefore avoid it. And should.

 

 

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.
All that effort for no reason. You were on a roll and hit a speed bump that shouldn't have been there... and you said nothing to nobody. Shame on you.

 

 

And that was my mistake copying from the updated INI
Nope. If it's released under the name sascm.ini, it's being proposed as a replacement. Yes we all have a choice n the matter and that's why we say the first rule of modding is backup. It was not you mistake and you should not have to be caustious of replacing a line with *gasp* its replacement. Had it never been f*cked up, you wouldn't have been set back, I wouldn't have been set back, none of our users... Everything to gain in keeping it in line. Change the text. Fine. Now its easier for humans to read. MB needs to be able to read it too and when you take a sledgehammer to its forehead, its vision is more than a little impaired. Or perhaps you didn't realize that using f*cked up files is essentially instructing MB to produced f*cked up code. Somehow, I don't think that that's how Barton intended his work to be used. And I'm frightened by anybody that would think that's okay.

 

 

BTW, because I got used of doing it for the opcodes that had original ordering.
Yeah, silly you. Everytime you pull the lever on the toilet, and there you are expecting to be able to pull the lever and make it flush. What were you thinking? Dirty creature of habit sarcasm.gif Welcome to human nature. Had one guy not chosen to sabotage it for everybody, your unconscious act of pulling the lever because you need to flush would've gone about its happy way then, now, and forevermore. You should push for such a dreamworld. Because until this nightmare came along, we all were able to enjoy that lullaby. I emplore you to produce ONE other example in the 3+ year history of SCM'ing where somebody fractured the community by shifting parameters. Ya can't do it!

 

 

I don't think this is as much of a problem you're making of it.
Some guys like it up the ass. I'm not one of them. Some people don't care if their users can use their mod or not. I'm not one of them. I've worked hard and for a long time to establish a legacy and a reputation, both of which are of a caliber far beyond such a stupid item derailing it all.

 

 

There's also an INI code converter, I haven't used it but I assume it works and it may help you.
The surgeon who proposes to put their tools into the chest of a loved one can see to it to put things back the way they found them. It doesn't matter to me that if the loved one dies, I can after the fact sue the surgeon and get some money. That loved one lived and breathed every day they were around and that surgeon CHOSE to take a position where putting things back the way he found them is key.

 

 

So please calm down, Space said above he will make you an INI with original ordering.
If that happens AND you get off my case, all will be well in time. What about the people that could've been coding alongside us and were put off by the simple crash I outlined above for example? What about all the people not reading this that have no way of knowing that the codes they're putting out there will only work for some people even though it SHOULD. We have NO WAY of knowing how far the damage reaches. But common sense dictates the damage should've never occured. It should be upsetting to you. If it's not, that's your choice. I had to rework a year's worth of work. Yes, I'm upset. And when you have your car stolen, you'll be too. And you'd be liable to punch somebody that told you to calm down, it's just a car.

 

Hint: It's the responsibility of the leaders of the community to lead wink.gif

 

@Pynton: Yes, and I owe you an apology. I was right to say upper locals in MAIN doesn't work. I was right to say that $PLAYER after 3 years of $PLAYER_CHAR when everybody's variables.ini say $PLAYER_CHAR. Apart from that though, I was wrong to malign your unified opcodes database. At the time, I took it to mean yet ANOTHER division. I was oblivious to this nightmare and did not realize you were aiming to repair the damages. For that I apologize. I appreciate your concern and your effort. However, this is space's to fix and it looks as if he's willing to take on that responsibility. With any luck, the result will look, feel, and (most importanly) behave just as we've come to expect over the years.

 

Guys, new people deserve the privilege of joining at any point, for any game, and be able to converse with the rest of us. Division (particularly UNNECESSARY division) is not acceptable. It is the responsibility of each of us to keep this process in check as it belongs to ALL OF US. If space is our new keeper of the INI/opcode database, I DO NOT have a problem with that. But each of us owes it to the rest of the community to keep him accountable. And space, if you're willing to make that commitment, you will be deeply appreciated for all your efforts. But you need to realize that you are accountable for everything you do with that which belongs to all of us. It was wrong of you to make the mistake you did even if it sounded good on paper. The damage does not have to be extensive to prove this, but it most likely has been. If just my work and the inconvenience it cause me was the only indicator, it would be too much. But it's NOT limited to me or my work. This has never happened before and we all need to support its reparation and quickly at that. We--all of us--need to stand together on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ceedj

I had a rather detailed response, but after all THAT, I decided that brevity is the key here.

 

1) My comment about the end of season 2 IS a compliment, after a fashion. I'll just leave it at that for now.

 

2) Space didn't f**k ANYBODY. Period. To coin a VKM phrase, "Demarest screwed Demarest." I'm pretty sure Space didn't take it upon himself to name himself the "ini guy", but it seems YOU have, which to me, is where the problem lies. You see Space as taking something that belongs to no one here (it really all belongs to R* - sure, others have translated it for us to use, but it needs thier game to run this stuff after all) and modifying it for his own uses. And he releases it, but the things he changed breaks some previously made mods. So he owns up to it, and IF HE WANTS TO, HE CAN CHANGE IT. But you have NO RIGHT to hold him responsible for anything that goes wrong. Yes, he should post in big letters THIS IS NOT CONVENTIONAL (I think he does this now), but that doesn't give you the right to herald him as the force of doom for all of GTA mission coding creation your posts are making him out to be.

 

You're pissed his changes messed some things up. I can appreciate that. But that's where it should have ended. No one here is "assigned" any task; Space is not the "ini" guy, pdescobar is not the SA Audio guy and I am certainly NOT the "C++ Hook" guy. We all do it (presumably) for fun, and if we can make a positive contribution, that's even better. Calling Space on this and requesting him to fix it is one thing. Saying he screwed the entire community is quite another, and it seriously needs to stop. You've made your point, now lets move on.

 

EDIT: If you'd like to continue this, please feel free to contact me via PM. Not everyone wants to watch you break down and respond to every single sentence someone posts. We get it already.

Edited by ceedj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
spaceeinstein
This seems unfair. Barton changed parameters around when he was editing the Vice City INI file. THe latest change I remember him doing was the deflate_tire opcode. He swapped the parameters and no one complained about that. Just do whatever you want to do. I just won't release another incompatible file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RainingAcid

I see why he was banned before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

"Demarest screwed Demarest."
After all my advocation for unity, you suggest I would swap params. Unreal. We don't know how many people got tripped up by this. I DO know this much: space changes nothing, nothing bad happens. space changes things (multiple times, amplifying the effect) and countless pitfalls ensue. Good taste would dictate that anybody planning on releasing it has a responsibility to not change a thing. Doing so accomplishes nothing (good).

 

 

You see Space as taking something that belongs to no one here (it really all belongs to R* - sure, others have translated it for us to use, but it needs thier game to run this stuff after all)
R* provides the opcode database? R* gives us the tools to mod with? R* provides us with INI's? Because you see, all this time, I thought it was the work of TbM2k, Barton (et al), CyQ, CtlAltDel, and so on. And I was additionally under the impression that they gave their work to all of us. Meanwhile, we are all using it. So if you'd like to be technical and say that we don't own it, okay. But it's still ours and nobody should feel themselves

 

 

the things he changed breaks some previously made mods.
*without reason You forgot the most important part.

 

 

you have NO RIGHT to hold him responsible for anything that goes wrong.
You have my word that I will do everything I can to OBSTRUCT anybody that would prey upon the unsuspecting. f*ck me, that's one thing. Make me f*ck any number of people, that's not right. And again, I point out that any number of new coders have walked away in exasperation over this.

 

 

pdescobar is not the SA Audio guy
With unbridled lack of respect like that, it's no wonder you would fight for one person's ability to flip the community upside down without reason.

 

 

We all do it (presumably) for fun
Delighting in others crashing their game for no reason is sick. I could care less if it's fun for him. He has no right to take anybody but himself down and with this, he gets to do it to an unkown amount of faces he never even has to hear from.

 

 

We get it already.
I don't think that you do. Nor do I think you can with comments like pdescobar isn't the SA audio guy.

 

 

 

Barton changed parameters around when he was editing the Vice City INI file.

Now you're comparing yourself to Barton? My my, there's no end to the level of disrespect you're capable of. Since you mentioned it, when Barton went from MB old school to MB new school, I not only gave him whatfor, but petitioned the community to stick with the tools (syntax) we had been releasing scripts for for a long time. That was over syntax, which is inconvenience more than anything. A crashing game is more than an inconvenience, especially if you are unable to diagnose it's cause. I feel sorry for all the little people that beat their head against the wall because you led them to believe all was well.

 

 

I see why he was banned before.

space breaking the INI is related to staff believing rumors that weren't true is related how? Your epidermis is showing and everybody can see it. How many offtopic posts do staff have to delete of yours before you get the picture that it's not welcome?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ceedj

 

 

pdescobar is not the SA Audio guy
With unbridled lack of respect like that, it's no wonder you would fight for one person's ability to flip the community upside down without reason.

 

WTF???

 

Cripes, do you even comprehend posts? Did you skip reading comprehension in school or something?

 

No forget it. I wash my hands of it. I'm fairly sure pdescobar would not have taken offense to my comparison (and if he did, my apologies), and I seriously doubt he'd even quote that completely out of context like that. Yes, right now he IS the authourity on SA Audio. Does that make him responsible for ALL things related to SA Audio? Does that mean if something goes wrong we should raise our proverbial swords against him too???

 

You are a fantastic coder, no question. But good grief, you really are a freaking nutjob.

 

Good luck in your crusade. suicidal.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
Yes, right now he IS the authourity on SA Audio. Does that make him responsible for ALL things related to SA Audio? Does that mean if something goes wrong we should raise our proverbial swords against him too???

If what he released caused our games to crash (not just ours but anybody that used our work that was built off of his), then yes. Under those circumstances, I would hope that HE would ask up to hold him accountable. After holding space accountable, saying I would expect the same for myself, and confessing that I held Barton to the same standard, you thought I'd make an exception for pdescobar? Yeah, I'm a nutjob for wanting uniformity; for wanting anybody to be able to join the coding scene at any point and still be able to get it done dozingoff.gif

 

But that's not why I came here. I came here for your favorite reason: a "new" opcode. With only one parameter, so all INI's will direct their respective tools properly! biggrin.gif

 

08EA: toggle_gangs_spawn 0/1

 

Of course 0 disables all gangs spawning and 1 enables them. Impacts random traffic as well. Interesting side effect: Turning it on from an off state sets the engine in some form of emergency. By that I mean: Set it to 0 and then set up a keypress trigger. Look around you and of course find no gang members (unless they were spawned before turning 08EA off. Now do your keypress. Now look around. You'll find at least one clump of gang members (territory applicable of course). Happened each and every time I tried it. The turnaround was so rapid I actually doubted my own suspicions at first. But instead, it's just a nifty side effect. So anybody writing a mod where they want gang members to be available NOW, turn 08EA off and back on. You MIGHT need a wait 0 inbetween to give the engine time to catch up. Not sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Augh

jesse (DexX) linked me here, it's not my fault.

 

So on to the post itself;

 

lol, drama

 

Cheers rampage_ani.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton

actually do i have to defend space or not? i would like to not do so.

 

the fact is that when he was finding tons of opcodes he was posting them in this topic prior to placing them in the updated ini. what it means basically is that EVERYBODY ELSE is guilty because of not testing his findings and helping him to put it in "english".

 

but i like the method: looking for somebody elses foult. ha ha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

Boy, the minimum kill competition sure is educational!

 

08F4: toggle_gang_recruitment 0/1

 

1 means CJ can recruit GSF in accordance with his current respect level. 0 means he cannot. If you currently are commanding any GSF when 08F4 is set to 0, they are immediately disbanded.

 

 

@Pynton: You're assuming people read. Just as space assumed everybody was on board. But see the thing is, if nobody changes things like param order or variable.ini names, nobody has to assume anything. Nobody has to do anything special. Change anything in either of them and suddenly games malfunction. NO AUTHOR aside from the two of you have EVER verbalized a desire to disupt the commUNITY. To change such things is a decision, leaving it as it is is an instinct. I've said that several times and I think the point isn't sinking in. For people to leave the param orders and/or var labels as is is one's default action. A person would have to make a conscious decision to override their own defaul and make such changes. Which is an indication of a motivator and additional items that clutter the picture. Had both been left alone now til the dieing days of SA modding, all that we'd have would be uniform, impossible to crash what's in existence, and that much less likely to confuse or dissuade modders coming up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton

what i have noticed: when i first introduced my database for opcodes there was no variables changed and the "actor" was yet the actor and it was containing the biggest amount of opcodes. and yet, PEOPLE here said that it is stupid because i am the most clever who likes to bring back natural order of parameters. i have even seen conclusions about that order has to be incorrect because it is the way it has been ble ble ble... well maybe we have to keep incorect logical swiches from space because after some time that is as well "the way it has been around here".

 

i will say that inside rockstar development team there were folks used to say "i want this command to be reversed because i am a snob" but yet finally they launched the project with the order we see AFTER toons of internal discussions. i see no reason to not use that.

 

Dem, why you just do not say:

quote Dem - Pynton, i like your idea of unifying the database, i do not like your sophisticated methods but i am willing to do it together with you because we can do it together so much better than yo do it right now.

quote Pynton - Dem, i can see, that you care so much so i am happy we want to do it together, especially 'cause you have that potential needed for such a task to perform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

what i have noticed: when i first introduced my database for opcodes there was no variables changed and the "actor" was yet the actor and it was containing the biggest amount of opcodes. and yet, PEOPLE here said that it is stupid because i am the most clever who likes to bring back natural order of parameters. i have even seen conclusions about that order has to be incorrect because it is the way it has been ble ble ble... well maybe we have to keep incorect logical swiches from space because after some time that is as well "the way it has been around here".

 

i will say that inside rockstar development team there were folks used to say "i want this command to be reversed because i am a snob" but yet finally they launched the project with the order we see AFTER toons of internal discussions. i see no reason to not use that.

What in the world are you talking about? Are you talking about space's naming of some of the opcodes backwards? Are you suggesting that I'm a snob because I say 1 is on and 0 is off? Because that was like that before I ever even entered the programming scene some 16 years ago. You appear to continue to assume that any of this has anything to do with ME.

 

 

Dem, why you just do not say:

quote Dem - Pynton, i like your idea of unifying the database, i do not like your sophisticated methods but i am willing to do it together with you because we can do it together so much better than yo do it right now.

quote Pynton - Dem, i can see, that you care so much so i am happy we want to do it together, especially 'cause you have that potential needed for such a task to perform.

Again, I don't entirely follow you. I wouldn't call changing the var names in codes you release and inducing malfunctions into people's games sophisticated at all. As for you eluding to caring, I hate to break it to you, but ALL OF US (not just me) were working together for years before you even showed up. It's a joke at best to suggest I don't care about this community, its processes, or whatever else you were suggesting I lack caring for or desire to work together. You're one of the ones who tried to do your own thing, so you kind of forfeited your ability to lecture others on working together. You already know that I agree with your effort to restore param order, that I disagree with inventing a new nomenclature scheme when the one in place has been used for years, and that I insist you do not release new variable.ini much for the same reasons why the params should've never been reordered. I am one of the most accomplished SCM'ers in this community and yet with all that I have done, never once have I even entertained or desired to change anything about it. In fact, nobody has. Just you two. That boggles the mind. I enjoy the spotlight, but I would never seek out reinventing the whell just to slap my name on it. Particularly when it would serve to stifle the community on the whole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

0433: actor_is_criminal 0/1

 

1 is yes. I'm assuming 0 (default) is no. Since GTA3, this has been the engine's way of knowing to increment your criminals wasted stat (automatic). I've not tested it in GTA3 or VC, but in SA, the engine makes the discernment between died by your hands or not. If somebody else kills him, it doesn't count as a criminal wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigun

 

0433: actor_is_criminal  0/1

 

1 is yes. I'm assuming 0 (default) is no. Since GTA3, this has been the engine's way of knowing to increment your criminals wasted stat (automatic). I've not tested it in GTA3 or VC, but in SA, the engine makes the discernment between died by your hands or not. If somebody else kills him, it doesn't count as a criminal wasted.

Nice little find. You miss the ACTOR parameter though in your post, it's sure to confuse newbs; also in the beginning I thought it was a CONDITIONAL because how you phrased it. It should be:

 

0433: set_actor $actor is_criminal  1

 

or to be more technical (this flag doesn't get set automatically by anything else, does it? does the engine set this on an actor if he killed somebody, or do gangers have this 'by default'? or is it just strictly limited to vigilante mission criminals (and maybe the hardcoded random-police-chase-event) )

 

0433: set_actor $actor criminal_flag  1

 

 

Wonder if there is a "check" opcode ('store_actor $actor criminal_status_to @0') or a conditional (' (is_)actor $actor criminal') for this too? Would make it more useful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
pdescobar

Making the trifecta with this notice since the issue appears in every version of the SASCM.ini I've found:

 

In space's SASCM.ini, opcode 080B looks like this:

080B,1,nop_consume_string %1d% 

. It's a NOP so it may not matter, but that syntax is different from everything else in the file and should probably be changed to

080B=1,nop_consume_string %1d% 

(note the equals sign after the opcode number instead of a comma).

 

Now, on to questions about INI opcode definitions. In the INI file, there are several different parameter identifiers such as the following:

 

; d% = anything

; p% = pointer

; t% = reference to '.ide' object models only

; o% = object models all types

; g% = gxt reference 8-byte strings

; x% = external script

; m% = statistics

; b:truestring/falsestring% = replace with truestring if nonzero, replace with falsestring if zero

The b identifier obviously can affect compilation/decompilation since it's doing substitution, but are any of the others actually meaningful to a compiler or are they strictly for human reference? I realize that question may be compiler-specific but I figured I'd take a shot and see if there is a general answer. Also, many of the entries in the INI file have parameters like %1h%. What is the specific meaning of h%?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
0433: set_actor $actor criminal_flag  1

 

You are correct. This is how it should be. I don't know about engine defaults, but I'm assuming any actor is presumed 0 unless told otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seemann

 

but are any of the others actually meaningful to a compiler or are they strictly for human reference?

My answer is obviously Sanny-specific. It uses only

 

 

'g'       as a GXT-entry param (to add a comment containing the gxt string)'p'       as a pointer (to parse the param as a label)'o', 't'  as a model ID (Sanny makes no difference between them; to replace the param value with the model name)'x'       as external script ID (to add script name e.g (DANCER))

 

 

So, the only identifier which is meaningful is 'p', because without it there will not be any labels in a code.

 

Others are only for reference.

 

 

What is the specific meaning of h%?

 

It seems it is a Handle parameter, but I don't know its actual meaning too sad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bigun

A quick question... I post it here because it IS after all the opcodes thread (although this opcode is definetely known for a long long time) and this doesn't deserve a new topic:

 

What is the purpose of

 

038B: load_requested_models

 

I was wondering, it isn't always used in original code after request_model's. What about request_model too. It doesn't actually LOAD the model? mercie_blink.gif What is 038B for? Also, does it load ALL requested models or just the ones from the current thread. If it does the first one, maybe it's a little bit wiser not to use it? This doesn't matter a lot, but I thought I'd ask...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest
I know what you mean. Just yesterday, I was curious what mission_cleanup does. It's used after all the disable markers, releases, remove, etc. Because I'm currently using a SCM with Windshield and Pillager sewn in. As soon as all the collectibles were out of the way, Pillager wouldn't actually make any markers. But it would still dismiss one. So when it hit mission_cleanup (you're talking within a few ms of load), it would actually dismiss the loaded TXD even though that thread had nothing to do with it! So for 2 hours, I was tearing my hair out trying to figure out why all of a sudden, Windshield wasn't reloading the TXD onload when it had been all along. In the end, I isolated the problem... but it makes no sense. I wouldn't mind knowing what mission_cleanup does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Demarest

 

Now, on to questions about INI opcode definitions. In the INI file, there are several different parameter identifiers such as the following:

 

; d% = anything

; p% = pointer

; t% = reference to '.ide' object models only

; o% = object models all types

; g% = gxt reference 8-byte strings

; x% = external script

; m% = statistics

; b:truestring/falsestring% = replace with truestring if nonzero, replace with falsestring if zero

The b identifier obviously can affect compilation/decompilation since it's doing substitution, but are any of the others actually meaningful to a compiler or are they strictly for human reference? I realize that question may be compiler-specific but I figured I'd take a shot and see if there is a general answer. Also, many of the entries in the INI file have parameters like %1h%. What is the specific meaning of h%?

O and T will cause MB on decompile to parse the values as their #NAME counterparts instead of their raw integer.

 

[EDIT]

This is untested, but I believe 05A5 is

 

05A5=8,  area_center %1d% %2d% scale %3d% %4d% overlaps_area_center %5d% %6d% scale %7d% %8d%

 

 

[EDIT2]

Also untested, but 061D appears to be

 

061D=7,mass_apply_point %1d% %2d% %3d% unknown_floats %4d% %5d% defined_aseqs %6d% store_to %7d%

 

I would assume param 4 is a radius, but param 5 is always the negative of param 4. At any rate, it appears to be a way to mass apply a particular set of defined action sequences.

 

[EDIT3]

 

0634=5,aseq_actor %1d% shoot_at_actor %2d% unknown %3h% %4d% ms_accuracy %5h%

 

Edited by Demarest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seemann

 

0A2D: toggle hide_styled_text_while_fading 0  // works with 00BA

 

P:

0 - text stays on screen

1 - text disappears when screen begin to fade // by default

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBumper

PLPynton how did you test 06E1?

 

I'm planning on running several tests by creating a plane and vehicle and watching the action it takes but if you have figured out a less complicated way of conducting tests on this opcode please share biggrin.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
K-Dawgg007
09C7: change_player_skin $PLAYER_CHAR to 105

 

This was in the PS2 version (for the 2 player mode) but removed from the PC version. But it still works on the PC. The 2nd parameter is the peds.ide ID number. Putting this in the beginning of the code will make CJ a Grove St gang member. I don't know how eating or working out will affect this skin though.

 

EDIT: A test of this in action:

user posted image

 

EDIT2: I've been getting a lot of bugs with this opcode. Here's how the same code looked the next time I started the game:

user posted image

confused.gif I know this post about the player-changing opcode is all the way in the beginning and that it was posted two years ago, but I just have this question of where exactly "in the begining of the code" do I put this thing? Because so far, the game crashes wherever I put this code. So if anybody could help me out...Thnx.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PLPynton
PLPynton how did you test 06E1?

 

I'm planning on running several tests by creating a plane and vehicle and watching the action it takes but if you have figured out a less complicated way of conducting tests on this opcode please share biggrin.gif

well, i am not willing to share anymore my knowledge with this part of the forum (because of the burnouts here- f...'em all thru they are small worms anyway) but well you are respected by me so i would be glad if i can help.

P1- constant, however i have had 2 buttons to create actor in vehicle and outside

P2- -1 or veh handle with buttons to switch them

P3- as above

P4- simple displayed int, with buttons to add and decrease it.

P5- simple displayed float, with buttons to add and decrease it.

P6- simple displayed int, with buttons to add and decrease it.

 

i have done it thru simple application to screw around memory of sa process, all was stored in script as globals and changed it over the external applications keyboard shortcuts but that is not actually "needed".

 

unfortunatelly i do not have anymore neither the snitch neither the code. i am sorry for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBumper
PLPynton how did you test 06E1?

 

I'm planning on running several tests by creating a plane and vehicle and watching the action it takes but if you have figured out a less complicated way of conducting tests on this opcode please share biggrin.gif

well, i am not willing to share anymore my knowledge with this part of the forum (because of the burnouts here- f...'em all thru they are small worms anyway) but well you are respected by me so i would be glad if i can help.

P1- constant, however i have had 2 buttons to create actor in vehicle and outside

P2- -1 or veh handle with buttons to switch them

P3- as above

P4- simple displayed int, with buttons to add and decrease it.

P5- simple displayed float, with buttons to add and decrease it.

P6- simple displayed int, with buttons to add and decrease it.

 

i have done it thru simple application to screw around memory of sa process, all was stored in script as globals and changed it over the external applications keyboard shortcuts but that is not actually "needed".

 

unfortunatelly i do not have anymore neither the snitch neither the code. i am sorry for that.

Your hard work is greatly appreciated, until you come along the discoveries pretty much dried up and quite honestly I lost interest in mission coding. If there is another place where you are posting your findings please send me a private message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Craig Kostelecky
confused.gif I know this post about the player-changing opcode is all the way in the beginning and that it was posted two years ago, but I just have this question of where exactly "in the begining of the code" do I put this thing? Because so far, the game crashes wherever I put this code. So if anybody could help me out...Thnx.

Are you properly loading the model that you're trying to change your character to before changing him?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BBumper

06E1:

 

--P4--

 

(25) - Vehicle follows player and stops

(50) - Vehicle appears to drive around aimlessly on the nearst vehicle path

 

--Previously Discovered---

 

When I left my vehicle the AI Car didnt follow me instead it stuck by the target vehicle also if the target vehicle is out of range the AI Car it wil act a little loopy as its trying to re-acquire the target.

 

(29) - Vehicle maintains left position of target vehicle

(30) - Vehicle maintains rigt position of target vehicle

(31),- Vehicle maintains back position of target vehicle

(32) - Vehicle maintains front position of target vehicle

(52) & (53) - Vehicle follows target vehicle but not the player

(64) - Vehicle drive around aimlessly

 

Anything above 68 does not work on the vehicle I tested

Edited by BBumper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Y_Less

Should one of those be 3o clock? Or more helpfully the angles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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