MAME 0.111 cheat file released

This forum is for making announcements about updated cheat files (for any emulator), updated web pages and of course about improvements to the MAME/MESS cheat engine.
User avatar
Pugsy
CheatFinder General
CheatFinder General
Posts: 3125
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2001 12:59 am
Location: North Wales, UK.
Contact:

MAME 0.111 cheat file released

Postby Pugsy » Wed Dec 20, 2006 12:15 pm

Merry Christmas

Cheat file has actually reduced in size due to the changes in the ddsom+clones entries....ddsom cheats are much easier to use now.
Pugsy

Servicing your cheating needs since 1985 ;-)

Grab the latest cheat collection:
MAME 0.187 XML cheat collection 7 JULY 2017) from http://www.mamecheat.co.uk or direct from:-
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0dvubha3b ... at0187.zip (ZIP Archive 1826 KB)

ShimaPong
Troublemaker
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 4:19 pm
Location: Japan

Postby ShimaPong » Wed Dec 20, 2006 5:05 pm

Pugsy gives you wrong info for cinemac.c games codes.
"Infinite" codes in these games are correctly "No Decreasing" type.
We should distinguish it from standard "Infinite" code.

Yes, Pugsy sometimes likes fuzzy management.
And I have been dicked several times.

Pugsy has NEVER asked me about my customization.
But next cheat engine update will require to reset the command (option) code again.
And lost 2nd Activation key information (especially label-selection) and save command code on the Options menu.

I don't hope to set "Show Activation Key Message" (and "Debug" in next update) by default.

Keep in your mind.

User avatar
Pugsy
CheatFinder General
CheatFinder General
Posts: 3125
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2001 12:59 am
Location: North Wales, UK.
Contact:

Postby Pugsy » Wed Dec 20, 2006 7:30 pm

ShimaPong wrote:Pugsy gives you wrong info for cinemac.c games codes.
"Infinite" codes in these games are correctly "No Decreasing" type.
We should distinguish it from standard "Infinite" code.


I remember we've had this discussion before, I refer you to my earlier answer here:-
viewtopic.php?t=2392&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=inexhaustible&start=20

The fact is that the CCPU is a awful CPU to trace through (unlike most other assembly languages) and it motors through instructions like nobodies business. That coupled with the fact that there's no memory setup to do normal watchpoints on means that the work finding the decrement was enough, the extra work with poking it to the maximum just wasn't worth the effort especially as nobody else could be bothered looking at them in the first place...describing them as Infinite Lives is fine as it's the description thats best suited to them.


ShimaPong wrote:Yes, Pugsy sometimes likes fuzzy management.
And I have been dicked several times.


I'm sorry if I've upset you....but I'm happy to explain and if necessary correct any parts of my 'fuzzy' management techniques ;-)


ShimaPong wrote:Pugsy has NEVER asked me about my customization.
But next cheat engine update will require to reset the command (option) code again.
And lost 2nd Activation key information (especially label-selection) and save command code on the Options menu.

I don't hope to set "Show Activation Key Message" (and "Debug" in next update) by default.

Keep in your mind.


Well all I can do is go on is how the cheat engine works on the release it was intended for. The reason I've changed the command selection in the cheat file is so that I could understand exactly what the cheat engine now does...to be perfectly honest I prefered it the old way - this BIT related way is not user friendly at all. The old way although not logical was easy to understand and you didn't have to gang all the options you wanted into a single :_command line.

The _command line that is active in the cheat file is the one that I thought was probably the best....if you disagree tell me which line should be enabled or change the defaults options in the cheat engine to at least have "Auto Save cheats" enabled as a default and I'll comment out them all.

I do appreciate the work on the cheat engine, I do like the way you can make lists from linked cheats and some of the stuff you've changed in the cheat menus is cool though there are a few things with the Classic Search menus I don't like though that maybe because you've never explained them.. Why has the EQUAL or NOT EQUAL disappeared from the Energy search and the only way of doing it now is using the Status EQUAL or NOT EQUAL search facility which is odd as they are meant for BIT searches so for example 0x81 and 0x88 should be EQUAL for the MSB. The Slow But Sure has disappeared completely...maybe this is what is being used and it's the STATUS search that has gone?

I appreciate that I haven't given you a lot of feedback, but to be honest I've never felt that you've ever welcomed any feedback and then either not releasing the source or passwording it and just telling Steph the password just builds on the assumption that you are going to do what you want to as by the time I could provide any feedback your changes have already been added to the official MAME source. Also as you are not a native english speaker I've felt that if anything I'd just confuse you more (and definitely vice versa ;-) )....so I've purposely stood back and let you get on with it. If you want feedback I'm happy to oblige though it's got to be an open 2-way deal.
Pugsy

Servicing your cheating needs since 1985 ;-)

Grab the latest cheat collection:
MAME 0.187 XML cheat collection 7 JULY 2017) from http://www.mamecheat.co.uk or direct from:-
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0dvubha3b ... at0187.zip (ZIP Archive 1826 KB)

User avatar
Gaius_4
CheatFinder Corporal
CheatFinder Corporal
Posts: 138
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:27 pm

Postby Gaius_4 » Wed Dec 20, 2006 7:42 pm

Before/If I Download... I don't really want to upgrade to MAME v.111. Will this still work with 110?
As always, your patients is appreciated. :cool:

Hawq
CheatFinder Private
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2003 3:02 pm

Postby Hawq » Wed Dec 20, 2006 7:50 pm

Gaius_4 wrote:Before/If I Download... I don't really want to upgrade to MAME v.111. Will this still work with 110?
Yes it will, the only changes are new and/or updated cheats, itll be fine with any Mame

User avatar
stephh
CheatFinder Brigadier
CheatFinder Brigadier
Posts: 648
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Paris, France

Postby stephh » Thu Dec 21, 2006 4:21 pm

Pugsy, I know it's nitpicking, but the parameter for "_command" cheat lines must be 8 digits long while yours is only 7 ...

Image Steph from The Ultimate Patchers Image

ShimaPong
Troublemaker
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 4:19 pm
Location: Japan

Postby ShimaPong » Thu Dec 21, 2006 5:35 pm

Pugsy wrote:I remember we've had this discussion before, I refer you to my earlier answer here:-

Sorry, I can't understand previous your viewpoint.
Because your English is too hard to trance correctly.

But I oppose it.
Someone will ask you, "Why doesn't this "Infinite Life" code give maximum lives, just like others ?"
Many (RAM based) "Infinite" codes give. It is true.
So people will believe that "Infinite" code gives extra value.
But a few ROM code does not.
Do you want to introduce confusion ?

You should give a commentary.

Pugsy wrote:The old way although not logical was easy to understand and you didn't have to gang all the options you wanted into a single :_command line.

Too late. Why do you explain the above thing before I send my customization ?

Pugsy wrote:because you've never explained them

No, I have explained with bullet point on customization thread.
But you have not replied. So I have gone forward.

Pugsy wrote:releasing the source or passwording it and just telling Steph the password

Because you NEVER asked me about it. Why did you tell me ?

Gaius_4 wrote:Before/If I Download... I don't really want to upgrade to MAME v.111. Will this still work with 110?

If you use 110 or before, the answer is No. Because old command code is deleted and only new command code.

But Pugsy doesn't add/replace code (eg 16-bit force range I have posted) so that he doesn't update a code about new functions.

Main problem for the latest database is too huge.
So too slow load and too slow search and even too unstable.
Pugsy may intend to break my CHEAP PC.

User avatar
Pugsy
CheatFinder General
CheatFinder General
Posts: 3125
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2001 12:59 am
Location: North Wales, UK.
Contact:

Postby Pugsy » Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:25 pm

ShimaPong wrote:
Pugsy wrote:I remember we've had this discussion before, I refer you to my earlier answer here:-

Sorry, I can't understand previous your viewpoint.
Because your English is too hard to trance correctly.

But I oppose it.
Someone will ask you, "Why doesn't this "Infinite Life" code give maximum lives, just like others ?"
Many (RAM based) "Infinite" codes give. It is true.
So people will believe that "Infinite" code gives extra value.
But a few ROM code does not.
Do you want to introduce confusion ?

You should give a commentary.


Yes it is true that many RAM based Infinite codes give the maximum displayable value. However it is equally true that some RAM Infinite codes don't poke the maximum displayable value because either it causes problems when you finish levels or the maximum displayable value differs for players (so the lesser of the maximum values is chosen to give symmetry in the display). There are several examples were some RAM Infinite Time cheats actually just poke the sub-timer so that when you finish a level you do not need to turn the cheat OFF as if the full timer location is poked you'd need to do....user-friendliness overules having the maximum value poked but it's still classed as 'Infinite'.

For Infinite ROM cheats the work required to have the maximum value poked is overuled by the amount of time that would need to devote to it - the CCPU is NOT nice and I used the time I saved to do cheats for most of the remaining CCPU which I believe is better use of the time? May I suggest if it bothers you that much you have a look at the CCPU assembler and see what I mean.

Some fuzziness in the rules is needed or some cheats would never get added, making cheats is a balancing act between a. functionality, b. user-friendlieness & c. amount of work needed. As long as a & b are good and c is not too great to get a & b to be good I'm happy. My problem is c....time.

ShimaPong wrote:
Pugsy wrote:The old way although not logical was easy to understand and you didn't have to gang all the options you wanted into a single :_command line.

Too late. Why do you explain the above thing before I send my customization ?


I DID make my feelings known about the suggested _command changes when Stephh suggested changing it to a BIT based system, see the 2nd post I made in this thread (and Stephh's follow up):-

viewtopic.php?t=2475

This post was made before you changed anything in the _command functioning - it just seemed to me that you just decided to ignore my misgivings and go your own way. Don't blame me for not speaking up as I DID!



ShimaPong wrote:
Pugsy wrote:because you've never explained them

No, I have explained with bullet point on customization thread.
But you have not replied. So I have gone forward.


To be honest, the reason why I never replied was partly due to the fact I could not understand what you were saying..this I'm sure is down to the fact that translation software in general is far from perfect. And unfortunately I make no allowances for translation software as I don't know enough about it to be able to make what I'm saying easier to translate. So having no source meant I couldn't experience the changes until it was already too late.


ShimaPong wrote:
Pugsy wrote:releasing the source or passwording it and just telling Steph the password

Because you NEVER asked me about it. Why did you tell me ?


I did drop some hints that I'd like the source but obviously I was too subtle - at the time you were having issues with another forum member so maybe I was just pussy-booting around you too much?

ShimaPong wrote:
Gaius_4 wrote:Before/If I Download... I don't really want to upgrade to MAME v.111. Will this still work with 110?

If you use 110 or before, the answer is No. Because old command code is deleted and only new command code.

But Pugsy doesn't add/replace code (eg 16-bit force range I have posted) so that he doesn't update a code about new functions.


Tell me EXACTLY what you want me to change and I'll update the cheat file..

ShimaPong wrote:Main problem for the latest database is too huge.
So too slow load and too slow search and even too unstable.
Pugsy may intend to break my CHEAP PC.


The latest cheat file is actually smaller than the previous cheat file which is a record in itself, I don't see the cheat file growing much bigger though. What problems is the the large cheat file giving you though? If it's only happening in a text editor may I suggest you try a different editor as I've had no problems with memory issues at all with the cheat file in various editors...
Pugsy

Servicing your cheating needs since 1985 ;-)

Grab the latest cheat collection:
MAME 0.187 XML cheat collection 7 JULY 2017) from http://www.mamecheat.co.uk or direct from:-
http://www.mediafire.com/file/0dvubha3b ... at0187.zip (ZIP Archive 1826 KB)

ShimaPong
Troublemaker
Posts: 1061
Joined: Wed May 21, 2003 4:19 pm
Location: Japan

Postby ShimaPong » Fri Dec 22, 2006 10:56 pm

Pugsy wrote:I DID make my feelings known about the suggested

Sorry, I forget so that I don't know because I'm stupid.
But it was for Stephh's thread. NOT my customization thread.
Why did you repeat it AFTER I posted the explain about command code on my thread ?
If you are satisfied with telling your viewpoint ON ANOTER THREAD, it is NOT extended to me at all.

Pugsy wrote:the reason why I never replied was partly due to the fact I could not understand what you were saying

I go forward UNLESS replay even if the modification is corruption for end-user.
"No Reply" means that "I have no complaints about your concept".

Pugsy wrote:smaller than the previous cheat file

Small ? 10 mega over text file is TOO HUGE on my CHEAP PC.

Pugsy wrote:What problems is the the large cheat file giving you though?

Over and over again, TOO SLOW LOAD and TOO SLOW SEARCH and even UNSTABLE.

Pugsy wrote:I suggest you try a different editor as I've had no problems with memory issues at all with the cheat file in various editors...

Tell me about JAPANESE TEXT EDITOR even if work fine on CHEAP PC.

Pugsy wrote:I've had no problems with memory issues at all with the cheat file in various editors

You NEVER have the problmes but I have problems.
You NEVER understand my CHEAP PC so that NEVER prepare.
But it is true. You have to keep this fact in your mind.

Anyway, too late now.
Because Windows crashed finally after unstable.
I have decided to re-install.

ZED ZED
CheatFinder Corporal
CheatFinder Corporal
Posts: 101
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 12:57 pm

Postby ZED ZED » Tue Feb 06, 2007 10:09 pm

Excellent release! Cheats bestow such power to the player!!

Thankyou Pugsy, you manage the cheat file with good sense and praiseworthy commitment. The cheat.dat continues to be a joy to use.

stranger_one
CheatFinder Private
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:40 am

Postby stranger_one » Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:54 am

First of all, thanks Pugsy for all the mame cheats and for your work on the cheat file through the years and pardon for my english.

I've just registered on this forum only due to ShimaPong's behaviour and manners. At first (reading some past posts) i thought that ShimaPong was a bot, yes a bot. I couldn't believe his/her/?its? bad-mannered replies, huge and childish colour signatures, etc.

Who the hell is ShimaPong?. I mean, ShimaPong, you're from Japan, is this the kind of education that Japan gives?, my bad. WHO are you to talk with such manners to the forum's members and specially to Pugsy?.

Please, stop acting like if you were a two years old baby that is crying all the damn day and show some respect to other people. Do you think that mame cheats are some kind of competition?, for christ's shake, it's only an ENTERTAINMENT. Relax, read a book, see a movie, date with some girl or play a videogame, but please, stop being a troll.

Sorry, Pugsy, for this rant but i think that i should say it.


Return to “Cheat Related Announcements”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests