Hello. Please delete my PCGamingWiki account and all account data (Including this "user talk") and please anonymise (preferably completely delete) edit history.
User talk:Suicide machine
Please delete my account
Splinter Cell Pandora Tomorrow
What is confusing you about the page and instructions ?
Check the changes I've made and if you don't like them - just revert them.
I'm not sure what were you trying to accomplish ? It seems you just moved widescreen and dgvoodoo fixes from "Video settings" and "Issues fixed" categories to "Essential improvements". If we would move those things around here, then we could do it for every other game. The whole "Essential improvements" category is already a gray area in general. IMO dgVoodoo is an essential patch for this game since it fixes many rendering bugs, while widescreen is not essential, but in this case that widesceen fix also includes dgVoodoo as an option... this is something for the supreme court.
Skip Bethesda.net account check on Doom Eternal
It didn't work for me. Maybe you have to login one time, then you can skip? I don't want to create an account, but can't skip the sign in nor the intro via +com_skipIntroVideo 1. My DE link at target is: "%mygames%\DOOM Eternal\DOOMEternalx64vk.exe" "+com_skipSignInManager 1" I even tried a commandfile with: DOOMEternalx64vk.exe +com_skipSignInManager 1
regarding your confirmation to: "Skip Bethesda.net account check • Link Use the +com_skipSignInManager 1 command line argument"
This post by Osprey was moved on 2017-09-27. You can find it at Thread:User talk:Suicide machine/Rose Tattoo.
I went to create a Vice City page to redirect to Grand Theft Auto: Vice City, but there seems have been an old one you deleted in July. Just wondering why? I mostly ask because there's still a San Andreas page that goes to Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas: http://pcgamingwiki.com/w/index.php?title=San_andreas&redirect=no
Because RaTcHeT302 tagged it for deleting (although didn't provide a reason for it) - it seemed a bit too loose for me to have it redirect to the page, so I went with request and deleted it. San Andreas is also kind of loose, so I just deleted it as well. Both of these changes can be reverted, so if you disagree - I think it'd be best to create a forum thread or hit us up on IRC.
Gene Troopers StarForce compatibility
Some versions of StarForce 3 can be updated to work on Windows 7 (see Windows 7 support); does this game use a supported version?
Thanks for pointing it out. Still uses 3.05.10 so nope :)
I have the informations you were looking for
for your problem with FIFA: Road to World Cup 98 CD path, I would look in the windows registry (use process monitor if you can't find the right key)
If registry search is still useless, check the .exe with an hex editor
Well, at least the date fits what developer has on their website.
As for FIFA: Road to World Cup 98 - it certainly not registry. 'cause I've tried it - there is nothing. You'd think, if EA was using the same engine for FIFA: Road to World Cup 98, FIFA World Cup 98 and FIFA 99 - then solutions would be more or less the same (both FIFA World Cup 98 and FIFA 99 define CD drive in a registry). For some reason, this is not a case with FIFA: Road to World Cup 98. I've stumbled upon some "fixes" and "super community patches" etc. but in all honesty - these are just cracks and I don't want to implement cracks in my solutions ;)
Thanks for the informations, though - I guess, I'll start working on Arsenal's page - if only there was more information what happened to Tactical Soft - their 2 Arsenal games were actually really cool - would love to see them again in digital distribution ;)
On the older archived version of their website there's a list of the members of the team. You could try to search their names on google, and if you were lucky enough you could even manage to contact one!
For the FIFA problem (if the only available fixes seems to be cracks) then, I would look in the game executable
If it's as easy as it was for me with atlantis - the lost tales, searching "E:", "D:", "F:" could be enough
I don't precisely know the problem, but.. I could dare: the game has an hardcoded drive letters (usually D:) and your drive is not D:, and this is why it fails the disk check
I've done some more testing of FIFA RTCW 98 using Virtual Machine. I'm almost certain, it's using letter of a first CD drive it can find. I've added one virtual CD drive to my virtual machine. Installed a game from the first one (D:) - works no problem. So I removed the game and everything what was left on a hard drive from it. "Ejected the disk" (virtual) and "Put it" into my 2nd virtual drive (E:). Tried starting a game and got "Please insert CD". And so I went to a device manager and disabled D: drive - the same. I then removed the game and installed again from the same drive (E) - basically an identical situation, but now installer couldn't find D: drive. I ran the game again - worked. So basically installer is witting somewhere a file that tells the game to which drive letter it should refer (registery is literally empty) - the only thing in it is "DisplayName"="FIFA RTWC 98", "3D Card"="None" and "Language"=dword:00000001.
After installation there is a INSTALL.DAT. It's only 2 bytes long. I have 2 versions of it - one from an installation I've made from D drive, the other one from installation from E drive.
From D drive it goes:
From E drive it goes:
I'm guessing this is what I've been looking for.
-- EDIT --
0118, which I assumed was going to be X and the game is now working on Windows 7. I guess it's time to write a page, then.
You can't play with the overlay, but the game does work fine in widescreen mode. Did you mean that the overlay isn't there? Otherwise the fix is misleading as at first I presumed the widescreen hack didn't work at all.
What I meant is that it straight up crashes and it doesn't work.
It works perfectly fine for me, did you try the latest files?
Yes, very old releases used to work. Newest ones (the ones with GUI) don't work.
And no - it loads config, it just doesn't start DreddHD.exe
I don't know what's wrong but it's working fine here, it's probably something on your side. http://i.imgur.com/Rbvv65i.jpg
I'd say, it's actually shitty programming and not a problem on my side.
Unless you can fix it yourself then I don't know what else to do, other than linking to the previous working version.
The thing is - you can't customize older versions.... and they definitely stretch from 4:3 anyway.
Also, Windows version?
Heh. 7 Ultimate.
I don't understand how that's of much use. Enterprise x64 if you really want to know.
Well the thing is, it can't be really an error with a file in a system - I recently ran SFC - there was nothing. The drivers are fine. Runtime libraries - fine. It's not UAC, since I have it on lowest settings (as it annoyed me). It's not anti-virus. If I had a look into a code, I might have tried to figure it out, but all I got is a bunch of screenshots with stuff blurred out, because apparently not everyone publishes their creations on GitHub.
I don't understand why he did that but, meh. If you want something done well you'll always have to do it yourself anyway, bleh.
Source and Direct3D
For all games using Source, they do have access to 5 different Direct3D shaders.
Edit: After some further digging, turns out I'm only half right. The mat_dxlevel command got removed after Left 4 Dead, locking all games into dxlevel 95 (DX 9 with SM 3).
Also, have you considered changes made with transition to Orange Box engine? Cause I'm pretty sure, Orange Box Engine removed support of anything lower than DirectX 8.0... and that transition affected Half-Life 2 and all of the episodes. I'm pretty sure, aside from games which weren't affected by transition (like Dark Messiah of Might and Magic), every Source Engine game is going to require at least DirectX 8 or maybe even DirectX 8.1 (SM - 2.0).
While I do agree key points should try to be succinct as possible, I don't think they need to be so barebone. People know how to read and this IS a wiki for PC gamers, and they come here to read information about the quality of PC ports and *why* they may be good, and *why* they may be bad.
Like, removing stuff like "This version is the latest patch" isn't necessary because in my opinion, they are very important because patches fix issues, nor does it hurt. And for stuff like Deadly Premonition's color palette, I don't think it was necessary to remove the video reference showcasing it in action.
In other words, I don't think key points should necessary be SHORT, but SUCCINCT. I hope this makes sense.
Yes, but then - I was googling if there is a patch available globally (in a way patches for older games are available) and I couldn't find it. So I don't seem to me like there is a point in featuring that kind of information, if all of the versions available legally seem to be up to date straight away. Alternatively - you can also state it in other sections - if there are patches, you can add patches section to essential improvements, if there aren't - you may add a note to availability section. I don't see a reason to keep that information in keypoints, simply.
I also don't say we should remove the video reference, just put it in the section like SweetFX or anything it relates to. Basically state what's wrong in keypoint and if there is a fix - make a link to that section. I just personally don't like keypoints taking more than 6 lines of text. It just looks ugly :P
The reason for patch information is to let the reader know that the original game at launch wasn't perfect and that things were improved. Deadly Premonition, for instance, had no controller support. I also like to know which patch is the latest just so I can ensure my version of the game is up-to-date. Patches show that the developers at least gave some amount of damn to improve it over the course of its release.
While DP was a crappy port at launch, it got much, MUCH better after modding and patches to the point where I believe it is the definitive version. Right now, the current key points are all negatives, so I also worry someone might see it and conclude that the 360/PS3 versions of the game are better, when they aren't. I try to be fair in judging the quality of PC games.
(I'm a bit of a "definitive version" whore, heh)
The video comparison was also in a reference, by the way, so it wouldn't take up much space in the key points.
Anyway, I just hope we can come up with a compromise. I feel you should be more concerned about the information being conveyed, rather than the length of it. I'll try to make things more succinct. Please try to be more aware of what you change. Thank you.