forums.marpirc.net

Haze wrote:thread hijacking a bit here..

since there are mspacman experts on here too, does anybody have any comments to add on this?
http://www.mametesters.org/mantis/view.php?id=1954

Allright thx, putting comment up there shortly...

movie shows it all.

you group them using side-doors like Abdner does.

I have see him do it and and can easily see how it works and how to utilize it...but I group them in a different fashion which semi-uses that but mostly making mspac go around the monster box to adjust the grouping instead of the side-doors...

side-door method much more effective though for getting tight grouping.

LN2 wrote:movie shows it all.

you group them using side-doors like Abdner does.

Well... Abdner doesn't have the ghosts follow him thru the tunnels like i do, and usually makes them circle the ghostbox and the inverted 'U' above it, for uncannily quicker and tighter grouping than i use. It was great to watch him play last May!

LN2 wrote: I have see him do it and and can easily see how it works and how to utilize it...but I group them in a different fashion which semi-uses that but mostly making mspac go around the monster box to adjust the grouping instead of the side-doors...

side-door method much more effective though for getting tight grouping.

As long as they get grouped and munched, there's no wrong or right way really

The 'tunnel-anomaly' as we've come to call it, where the ghosts stay in the tunnels too long on boards where they shouldn't, apparently originated with Mame 0.91.
It's a minor problem really, but it does significantly alter grouping methods, as my vid showed; specifically when sending one or 2 ghosts thru the tunnels while the loose ghost(s) loop(s) around to the other side of the board.

I can't believe I never noticed that anomaly...but I seriously haven't played mspac since likely 0.78 where it likely was fine so maybe didn't miss anything.

present this to TG so for mspac they can maybe allow 0.78 as the official version for mspac(test it in that to see if ok or other issues).

Yeah 0.78 is fine, WolfMame 0.90 would have my vote until the next fix at least.
I've tried to tell TG about it, and also suggested that for MsPac they should also accept another MAME version besides 106, i.e. one without the anomaly. I have sent 2 different referees a private message regarding this topic on the TG forum, but unfortunately i'm not getting a reply.

I should have mentioned it at FunSpot this year with all of TG running around there, but i simply forgot.

Thx for your note

best chances are if you request that the formerly officially accepted TG version of 0.78 be used for mspacman.

for the june 2008 challenge game of the month....I got TG to accept using 0.78 for mschamp for turbo issues...but likely the side-door issue as well...instead of 0.106....was pretty quick decision as well.

so you even have a precedent to assist this quest.

I looked at my older submissions....most of my pac/mspac play was back when 0.60 and 0.66 were "current". TG was officially accepting 0.60 back then.
this is way pre-wolfmame days.

I have to get into playing mspac again...figure a few weeks of training and I would be at or above where I was in the past.

got a different fish to fry first though.

Does that "different fish" eat dots & ghosts for a living? If so, I look forward to seeing the INP. Either way, good luck!

PS - Will it be in Mac or Win?

Eric

hmm .78 is running a bootleg version of the game NOT the original.. using it for scores on TG would be the same as using a bootleg board for scores, would that be allowed?

as for the problem.. dwidel replied on mamedev and said based on his tests his *original* mspacman board (on which the currnet code is based) exhibits the same behavior as mame does now, so make of that what you will..

ejm973 wrote:Does that "different fish" eat dots & ghosts for a living?

perhaps...

PS - Will it be in Mac or Win?

Eric

arcade machine first...I hope...then wolfmame.

if I get a new mac I will play wolfmame through XP running on it. it will still be 3 times faster than this now old laptop.(1.3 celery!!)
if not then still with this laptop....using wolfmame...to also set wolfmame WR...not sure I would post this to marp though...will have to wait and see.

Are you planning the arcade attempt at FS, or elsewhere? I ask b/c if you were thinking about a Nov FS attempt, I might want to witness it.

Good luck, Rick!

Haze wrote:hmm .78 is running a bootleg version of the game NOT the original.. using it for scores on TG would be the same as using a bootleg board for scores, would that be allowed?

No idea Haze...
So even if you use the original romset and copy it to .78 (e.g. copy to roms folder), it will still run as bootleg? I'm not clear on how that works

Haze wrote:as for the problem.. dwidel replied on mamedev and said based on his tests his *original* mspacman board (on which the currnet code is based) exhibits the same behavior as mame does now, so make of that what you will..

Well that's strange isnt it!
I have no knowledge of codes or programming so the only thing i can offer is that ALL the MsPac arcade games i have EVER played, and that includes those in 3 different countries, do NOT exhibit that side-door issue that WolfMame-095 does as depicted in my youtube-vid (and all other versions from 0.91 - 1.26, apparently).
I stand by the arcade and pre-Mame-091 versions as to how MAME should behave!!

Thx

PacWhiz wrote:

Haze wrote:hmm .78 is running a bootleg version of the game NOT the original.. using it for scores on TG would be the same as using a bootleg board for scores, would that be allowed?

No idea Haze...
So even if you use the original romset and copy it to .78 (e.g. copy to roms folder), it will still run as bootleg? I'm not clear on how that works

yes, MAME will load the original set, then in the MAME code we apply the same modifications the bootleggers made so that the game runs. So it's basically running the bootleg. The same could be said for a lot of games where MAME simulates the protection, unless the simulation has been verified with extensive tests on the original PCB, or the device is actually emulated then there is a chance it won't behave exactly like the arcade. Look how long it took for Bubble Bobble to be *perfect*.

PacWhiz wrote:

Haze wrote:as for the problem.. dwidel replied on mamedev and said based on his tests his *original* mspacman board (on which the currnet code is based) exhibits the same behavior as mame does now, so make of that what you will..

Well that's strange isnt it!
I have no knowledge of codes or programming so the only thing i can offer is that ALL the MsPac arcade games i have EVER played, and that includes those in 3 different countries, do NOT exhibit that side-door issue that WolfMame-095 does as depicted in my youtube-vid (and all other versions from 0.91 - 1.26, apparently).
I stand by the arcade and pre-Mame-091 versions as to how MAME should behave!!

Thx

maybe the board that was tested was faulty.. or was 'aware' that tests were being ran on it and returned incorrect values.