SDA-approved DOSbox?

Kiyura

Edit history:

Kiyura: 2011-03-07 01:01:52 pm

Kiyura: 2011-03-07 01:01:25 pm

2011-03-07 01:00:51 pm

Wiiaboo

I may be missing something obvious here, but what's wrong with recording the full screen with dosbox running windowed (No modifications necessary)? That would effectively prevent the use of savestates or slowdowns without some extensive video editing which someone determined could pull off in any case.

Obviously this would be for verification purposes only, with the video being cropped for publishing.

ExplodingCabbage

2011-03-07 03:42:05 pm

Quote from Kiyura:

I may be missing something obvious here, but what's wrong with recording the full screen with dosbox running windowed (No modifications necessary)?

How would this make using savestates any harder?

Sir VG

2011-03-07 03:45:54 pm

Fucking Weeaboo

Quote from ExplodingCabbage:

Quote from Kiyura:

I may be missing something obvious here, but what's wrong with recording the full screen with dosbox running windowed (No modifications necessary)?

How would this make using savestates any harder?

Basically I think Kiyura is suggesting recording full screen, thus showing the computer clock and such, so if save states are used, it would be a bit easier to catch it.

UraniumAnchor

2011-03-07 09:01:52 pm

Not a walrus

Have the IRC channel being recorded behind the game window. (Half-serious suggestion.)

Nihilus

2011-03-07 10:00:57 pm

Any game can be cheated. I think by trying to set up a system to make cheating more difficult is just encouraging people to try and beat that system. I think DOSBox should just be accepted, with settings for each game determined by the community on an individual-game basis. If extreme play presents itself, the usual 'button-mashing proof' videos should suffice.

UraniumAnchor

2011-03-10 01:26:33 pm

Not a walrus

The point isn't to make it impossible to cheat, it's to make it *more difficult* to cheat. Recording extra space around the main video isn't an unreasonable thing to ask for.

Chrno

2011-03-10 01:33:24 pm

WOW.

Quote from UraniumAnchor:

Have the IRC channel being recorded behind the game window. (Half-serious suggestion.)

An ok suggestion, but I always play my games fullscreen and I don't really want to record my game in a windowed state.

UraniumAnchor

2011-03-10 02:02:58 pm

Not a walrus

It's probably a bit too easy to get around that with clever video editing anyway (I could do it in Avisynth in about two minutes of script work) so that's not something I'd settle on anyway.

Zealie

2011-03-11 02:35:01 am

can't you basically 'cheat' almost all games with clever video editing.
That is, all games that have some sort of transition/black out thing (from room to room or when entering/leaving something)

tjp7154

2011-03-11 04:16:50 am

#Casual

I'm curious, how does Twin Galaxies handle this issue with their verifiers? What safeguards do they have for video submission?

ZenicReverie

2011-03-11 11:33:46 am

Waiting hurts my soul...

No extra safeguards against video editing that I know of. They do require raw DVD or VHS recordings for consoles (i.e. no digital submissions), but for MAME I'm not sure how that would work.

cortez

2011-04-02 03:55:14 pm

Stalker!

isnt virtual pc like an official emulator?

Axel Ryman

2011-04-04 07:37:28 am

We all scream for Eyes Cream

Quote from cortez:

isnt virtual pc like an official emulator?

Discussion of this was done on the first page a bit.

Quote from Lag.Com:

Yes, Virtual PC lets you run DOS games, as well as a lot of other things. However, it does also technically allow savestates.

While I'm for recording extra space around the video, the only problem I see with it is people asking for NES, SNES, GBA, Genesis, etc emulators to be acceptable as well. Creating an SDA-Approved DOSbox seems a bit impossible due to people being able to modify it themselves and such, so this is quite a conundrum.

PreddY

2011-05-27 06:44:54 am

Hope rides alone.

isnt that what Verification is for? send in a DOS run, let the verification judge it whether they think its cheated or not (come on, you can see if some actions are super-human or skill if you look closely, verification isnt just watch the run and say ACCEPT, its to actually JUDGE (like Yours Truly did...!)) and if its not cheated, accept it.

I did a run of an old DOS adventure, Chewy ESC from F5, if anyone knows, because i happen to still own it and I was shocked that DOSbox isnt accepted cuz its so easy to record a movie there and I couldnt think of the possibility that DOSbox could be forbidden.

So I might send in the run or just put it on YT. Honestly, I didnt even know there are savestates in DOSbox until I read this thread Smiley

Reaver

2011-05-30 06:50:24 pm

Quote from PreddY:

isnt that what Verification is for? send in a DOS run, let the verification judge it whether they think its cheated or not (come on, you can see if some actions are super-human or skill if you look closely, verification isnt just watch the run and say ACCEPT, its to actually JUDGE (like Yours Truly did...!)) and if its not cheated, accept it.

You don't have to abuse the hell out of savestates and pull off superhuman like maneuvers to cheat. There are various points in certain games that can kill a run completely by simply missing a difficult jump or facing an annoying enemy etc. that would often result in someone restarting. You could use savestates to deal with that particular obstacle or obstacles and pull off a run without using them anywhere else. Using savestates in only one or 2 spots in a run could go undetected.

If you possessed the necessary equipment, would recording yourself playing on a webcam or another recording device be out of the question? At least until another method is established. You would then have the recorded game captured with the appropriate software along with video proof that savestates weren't used.

[quote="PreddY"]isnt that what Verification is for? send in a DOS run, let the verification judge it whether they think its cheated or not (come on, you can see if some actions are super-human or skill if you look closely, verification isnt just watch the run and say ACCEPT, its to actually JUDGE (like Yours Truly did...!)) and if its not cheated, accept it.[/quote]

You don't have to abuse the hell out of savestates and pull off superhuman like maneuvers to cheat. There are various points in certain games that can kill a run completely by simply missing a difficult jump or facing an annoying enemy etc. that would often result in someone restarting. You could use savestates to deal with that particular obstacle or obstacles and pull off a run without using them anywhere else. Using savestates in only one or 2 spots in a run could go undetected.

If you possessed the necessary equipment, would recording yourself playing on a webcam or another recording device be out of the question? At least until another method is established. You would then have the recorded game captured with the appropriate software along with video proof that savestates weren't used.

mikwuyma

Edit history:

mikwuyma: 2011-12-09 06:54:41 am

2011-12-09 06:52:35 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Okay I'm reviving this because recording on an actual win98 or older PC is only getting harder (and it's hard enough as is), and more and more old games are being officially rereleased using DOSBOX.

Instead of making an SDA-version of DOSBOX, how about just the runner showing proof in one of two ways.

1. Streaming while they're recording, and highlight the stream footage to prove they didn't cheat.

2. Use a Camera on themselves and the screen while recording to prove they didn't cheat.

I'll admit this isn't the most elegant solution, but it's probably better than just banning dosbox, since there's definitely some DOS classics that could use some runs, and DOSBOX is only going to become more prevalent.

CrypticJacknife

Edit history:

CrypticJacknife: 2011-12-09 07:13:23 am

2011-12-09 07:13:08 am

Ganondorf = Donkey Kong LOOK IT UP!!

Well...this certainly changes a few things. Good to hear the hundreds of worthy DOS titles can finally have a shot at being on SDA Smiley

I expect much progression if that train of thought sticks.

mikwuyma

2011-12-09 07:28:09 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I'm not saying this is a hard and fast rule yet, but really need to get something sorted out for DOS games, and I believe this is probably the best solution.

ZenicReverie

Edit history:

ZenicReverie: 2011-12-09 09:32:30 am

2011-12-09 09:31:13 am

Waiting hurts my soul...

I've not played around with anything DOSBOX (that I know of), but is there a concern regarding game speed? What version of DOSBOX does one use if it's not packaged with a released game? Do we care if they're playing off an imaged backup or if they no longer have the original game? Does this apply for all hard to emulate PC games or are DOS games now the exception?

ExplodingCabbage

Edit history:

ExplodingCabbage: 2011-12-09 01:37:58 pm

ExplodingCabbage: 2011-12-09 01:37:22 pm

ExplodingCabbage: 2011-12-09 01:36:12 pm

2011-12-09 01:34:00 pm

Quote from ZenicReverie:

I've not played around with anything DOSBOX (that I know of), but is there a concern regarding game speed?

Yes. As mentioned already in the thread, many DOS games have no timer of any kind and so the game runs as fast as the CPU is capable of running it. This is basically why DOSBOX has the option of increasing or decreasing the number of CPU cycles it emulates per second; if it ran as fast as it's capable, many games would run so fast that they would be unplayable. (As in, you'd tap a movement key and instantly be at the other side of the map, in a corner, or dead).

I struggle to see how SDA would be able to accept runs of such games since for any competition to be possible we (or the runner) would need to designate some arbitrary CPU cycle rate as the SDA-official rate for the game in question - which doesn't feel very SDA-like to me.

However, there's absolutely no reason I see for us not to allow DOSBox for games that have some sort of game speed control that isn't affected by CPU speed. Also, if there are official rereleases of games that use DOSBox and come with a launcher that sets the CPU Cycle Rate to a fixed playable level, then we can use that level and we're no longer having to arbitrarily decide one ourselves. I'd be happy to see some such DOS runs on SDA, but I'm not sure how many fall into this category and are actually sensibly runnable. The Sierra Quest Collections, often mentioned when DOSBox comes up, are notable for being a bit of a grey area in this regard: in KQV, KQVI, SQIV and, I think, SQV and SQVI, there is a game speed limiter when the characters are performing most actions other than walking, but when merely walking around on the highest gamespeed, you walk as fast as the processor can generate frames.

[quote="ZenicReverie"]I've not played around with anything DOSBOX (that I know of), but is there a concern regarding game speed?[/quote]

Yes. As mentioned already in the thread, many DOS games have no timer of any kind and so the game runs as fast as the CPU is capable of running it. This is basically why DOSBOX has the option of increasing or decreasing the number of CPU cycles it emulates per second; if it ran as fast as it's capable, many games would run so fast that they would be unplayable. (As in, you'd tap a movement key and instantly be at the other side of the map, in a corner, or dead).

I struggle to see how SDA would be able to accept runs of such games since for any competition to be possible we (or the runner) would need to designate some arbitrary CPU cycle rate as the SDA-official rate for the game in question - which doesn't feel very SDA-like to me.

However, there's absolutely no reason I see for us not to allow DOSBox for games that have some sort of game speed control that isn't affected by CPU speed. Also, if there are official rereleases of games that use DOSBox and come with a launcher that sets the CPU Cycle Rate to a fixed playable level, then we can use that level and we're no longer having to arbitrarily decide one ourselves. I'd be happy to see some such DOS runs on SDA, but I'm not sure how many fall into this category and are actually sensibly runnable. The Sierra Quest Collections, often mentioned when DOSBox comes up, are notable for being a bit of a grey area in this regard: in KQV, KQVI, SQIV and, I think, SQV and SQVI, there is a game speed limiter when the characters are performing most actions other than walking, but when merely walking around on the highest gamespeed, you walk as fast as the processor can generate frames.

UraniumAnchor

2011-12-09 01:42:10 pm

Not a walrus

If the game is old enough to care about CPU speed to that degree, we can just say to leave the cpu speed at the dosbox default. I can't think of a game that would be unplayable slow at that speed, but it wouldn't surprise me if there is one.

ExplodingCabbage

2011-12-09 01:43:07 pm

That may be a reasonable approach, UA - I haven't tried enough games in DOSBox to know either way.

bmn

2011-12-09 03:19:28 pm

Would this approach also apply to virtualisation solutions like VirtualBox and VMWare, Mike? I got some old Windows stuff I'd like to give a shot...

Lag.Com

2011-12-09 03:49:55 pm

sda loyalist

This is really great news and I'm behind it 100%.

CosmoWright

2011-12-09 04:24:04 pm

When I started doing runs of Keen4 I noticed the framerate would sometimes stutter and be weird about my inputs. I set it to max-cycles in dosbox, which got rid of lag/stuttering and made load times instant. Wondering if this would be allowed.