But I am thinking the note system and people sharing their experience will get around to figuring this out."We're in a world of facehuggers, and you, Hericksen, are still the entity I would least like down my throat." Which I guess is one problem there is with the approach of "assuming its fully working and downgrade when bugs are found" if what is found is someone not using the most optimal settings or have some RAM ghosting from previous boots giving problems. The first tab is meant to be a quick test to help others know what games seem to be possible to get to work. Nice addition with the extra tabs with more specific names, that is the best way to approach this. I will update the list as it is now using those, and I think I will add something that explains them. I think the Dosbox legend is a good way of doing it. It has been done a bit fast though, and the first goal was mainly to help people find out which games are working so they could try them and test the core in the state it is in now. Then get bumped down to playable if and when bugs are found. I think it makes sense to assume they are fully working until bugs are found. For some reason everything on the list currently says working, and that is not how it started out. Its fully open so anyone with the link can change it, but there is a change history as well. The Dosbox example took several years to have such a complete list and the testing was done by a lot of people.Ĭhecking up on the list now, I see it has been changed a bit. I have already been testing for several hours, and I tried to make it quick. I figured it would be downgraded once anyone ran into bugs that would stop it from being fully working. So far by "working" I just means playable in some way.
Thus runnable - playable - supported or something similar? So before we start reinventing the wheel again, could we use the Dosbox legend for example
Working imo means that I could finish the game without any problems.
0 kommentar(er)
