+5 SA limit

[X-Seti]

 

frickin double post, smtp board error (sorry)

When you get the SMTP error it doesn't mean your post has failed, IF you get this error next time, check the thread first before you re-port because your find your post was accepted.

 

SMTP is an mail server related error, it means that those subscribed to the thread will not get a reminder saying that someone has posted/replied to the thread they subscribled too.

Edited July 25, 2006 by Mc-Kay

[BMWPower]

+5 SA limit mod is released in gta.gamigo.de, it works great, i've tested it

[DexX]

 

+5 SA limit mod is released in gta.gamigo.de, it works great, i've tested it

ha, you mean gta3.net?

 

This is not Andy's work, which as far as this topic goes, doesn't look like it was ever finished. The mod your talking about, is different, its just the multiobj.ide, and dynamic.ide, with 24 items commented out. Although that would work, it may raise compatability issues with other mods (since we don't know if *they* use the commented-out items), and isn't a solution i would recommend using.

Of course, if one is doing a TC, or a full map replacement, then this would work perfectly well - except in those cases, the object limit isn't an issue

[ChrisBenoit!]

I hope you finish this tool^^

Edited January 6, 2007 by ChrisBenoit!

[TonyResta]

ok, so from what i understood (correct me if im wrong) someone has made a utility that uppers the limit but has been refused by r* after the hot coffee incident, if this is true, then the owner of the utility should still have the program, so i presume you are using it for your game only?

[ParoXum]

Lol, I dont think this is a plot form R*..

 

If Andy doesn't continue his project, it's perhaps because of his familly life, or because he encountered an inevitable hack problem, like secured adresses that are frozen. I personnaly don't know.

 

I'm working since one week now on a hack for these limits, and had to research other offsets for the limits, because of the crack/normal exe differences.

 

With another french modder, i'm working on a Limit Adjuster, perhaps we'll block on the same place as Andy. Dont really know. For the moment we have 25 objets ingame over the +5 limit.

[pirlano]

i think the problem is in the value pointed in eax

here--->

.007F39F0: 8B442404 mov eax,[esp][04]

.007F39F4: 53 push ebx

.007F39F5: 83C008 add eax,008 ;"◘"

.007F39F8: 55 push ebp

.007F39F9: 56 push esi

.007F39FA: 57 push edi

and here we got an exception->

.007F39FB: 8B18 mov ebx,[eax]

.007F39FD: 89442414 mov [esp][14],eax

 

maybe with a back tracing we can discover the problem

(modifing the jump i got some error because this routine is used by other call)

[jarjar]

It's unlikely R*/T2 won't release a PC version just because they're afraid of a few "hackers". They'd rather lock, secure and encrypt every single bit, than to loose several million $$. They simply can't afford it.

That's correct, but even if they encrypt the files, we'll find a way around it . I'll know what kind of thing we're up against when I buy a copy of there Tennis game on Tuesday, then we'll know what kind file formats there using. But to be entirely honest, I don't think they will block modding at all. It's making them money allowing us to mod there game. Some people (like myself) bought the PS2 and PC versions, because we wanted to mod the PC version but still play San Andreas. but we'll see I guess.

[pirlano]

i think that stop modding it's a suicide for *R

if SA wasn't moddable now it was an old game...

[pirlano]

this is the point of the situation:

0x4c5845 (IDE limit)

0x4c5cbb (IDE limit)

0x1265113(IDE limit)

0x125073D(??IDE limit??)

0x551106 (COL limit)

0xE93A89 (??COL limit??)

0x55105e (IPL limit)

 

adding new ide ipl & col, the game bar load, but crash ingame...

 

@diabolyX: do you have msn?

[Andy80586]

There is no plot by rockstar folks... just a desire to finish old work and mods and make final versions of stuff instead of releasing half-assed programs full of bugs. I also don't work on this stuff consistently which I am sure you all have noticed here.

 

Right now I am implementing code for a major breakthrough involving the object limit in Vice... last night/early this morning I finally understood why each set of ID data remained at 20 bytes instead of the 24 that it needs to be. Since SA has a limit of 20000, which is less than 65535, the same or a very similar ID structure probably applies to SA. Here is how it works in Vice:

 

(offset + 0) - 4 bytes

(offset + 4) - 4 bytes

(offset + 8) - 1 byte

(offset + 9) - 1 byte

(offset + 10) - 2 bytes (this needs to be changed to 4 to get 32-bit limits)

(offset + 12) - 4 bytes

(offset + 16) - 4 bytes

total = 20

 

So the new ID structure will be something like one of these 24-byte structures:

 

(offset + 0) - 4 bytes

(offset + 4) - 4 bytes

(offset + 8) - 1 byte

(offset + 9) - 1 byte

(offset + 10) - 4 bytes

(offset + 14) - 4 bytes

(offset + 18) - 4 bytes

(offset + 22) - 2 bytes of blank space

total = 24

 

(offset + 0) - 4 bytes

(offset + 4) - 4 bytes

(offset + 8) - 1 byte

(offset + 9) - 1 byte

(offset + 10) - 2 bytes of blank space

(offset + 12) - 4 bytes (ID limit)

(offset + 16) - 4 bytes

(offset + 20) - 4 bytes

total = 24

 

So why the 2 bytes extra space for 24-byte structures instead of making 22-byte structures? Answer has to do with the way the structures are created (what I found last night), which is with 2 lea commands in the asm code (illustrated below). There is plenty of code (can substitute different variables in place of eax) like this:

 

xor eax, eax (eax becomes 0)

inc eax (eax becomes 1)

lea eax, [eax + eax*4] (eax = eax*5, so eax = 5)

lea eax, ds:0[eax*4] (eax = eax*4, so eax = 20)

 

Now consider this code, which will be replacing many cases of the above:

 

xor eax, eax (eax becomes 0)

inc eax (eax becomes 1)

lea eax, [eax + eax*2] (eax = eax*3, so eax = 3)

lea eax, ds:0[eax*8] (eax = eax*8, so eax = 24)

 

The only way to get 22 is to multiply 11 by 2, and there is no lea command that will multiply by 11 (can only multiply by 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, or 9).

[DexX]

 

(offset + 10) - 2 bytes (this needs to be changed to 4 to get 32-bit limits)

um, does that mean we could theoretically have up to 4 million or so objects (Data Types for the unenlightened) ?

[Andy80586]

(offset + 10) - 2 bytes (this needs to be changed to 4 to get 32-bit limits)

um, does that mean we could theoretically have up to 4 million or so objects (Data Types for the unenlightened) ?

It means we will run out of memory before we reach the maximum object limit.

[DexX]

 

It means we will run out of memory before we reach the maximum object limit.

Good (that its potentially possible to have the map limitations be the hardware, and no longer hardcoded)

[Andy80586]

exactly... one of the main things i want in my vc limit adjuster are hacks that work for all cases (or at least up to a very high number that would take a long time to get to). i am also aiming for no bugs in the .exe (testing the game with VC 1.0 and 1.1, and i want to get a copy of the australian version so it can work there as well). once the critical patches in vc are finished sa will get some more time.

[ChrisBenoit!]

Did you continue the work for a SA Limit Adjuster?

 

I want a Beta ^^

Edited January 6, 2007 by ChrisBenoit!

[Andy80586]

I am not working on this until I finish the water limits, the water generator, and the path quantity limit for VC, and run it through a solid amount of testing to make sure it works correctly. For now if you want to mod on SA you can get the latest version of State of Liberty for VC - there should still be some ID spaces left to put some more objects in.

[Don Wasyl]

Any progress?

[Marcin6]

Yeach , how much % is done ??

[Marcin6]

i think it`s time to refres this topic .

[Mark]

Quit the bumping.

 

@Andy: PM me if ya want it unlocked at any stage.