| Lunar IPS vs. IPSharp |
|
Forum Index - Important - Announcements - Lunar IPS vs. IPSharp |
|
Pages:  1 2  |
Thread Closed |
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 04:04:58 PM |
Link |
|
I'd keep both around. Give users a bit of choice. They both work. If there really only must be one file, have them in a pack together.
I'd also propose we put ZSNES, BSNES, and SNES9X in an emulator pack together.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 04:12:28 PM |
Link |
|
Why do we have Clips then, stingy Alcaro?
"It's just a command line IPS patcher. Nothing more."
|
| Last edited on 2012-09-04 04:12:53 PM by maro. |
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 04:14:36 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by maroWhy do we have Clips then, stingy Alcaro?
"It's just a command line IPS patcher. Nothing more."
I'd actually use this one more, it's also more cross-compatible.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 04:35:49 PM |
Link |
|
It's there for Linux users who don't want to open WINE.
...Actually, it was pretty much requested by p4plus2 (a Linux user) for some bulk patching, far before SNN starting this cleaning. I won't mind if it's removed.
...though I'm not really sure why posting a list of bugs and making it as complete as I can makes me stingy. Half of my intention was creating a (tiny) hope that the bugs could be fixed; the first thing you need to do to fix a bug is finding it.
|
| Last edited on 2012-09-04 04:38:40 PM by Alcaro. |
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 04:54:20 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by MVSI'd also propose we remove ZSNES and put BSNES and SNES9X in an emulator pack together.
Fixed for better accuracy.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 05:01:36 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by Derpy BackslideOriginally posted by MVSI'd also propose we remove ZSNES and put BSNES and SNES9X in an emulator pack together.
Fixed for better accuracy.
Ohohohoho another 'ZSNES sucks and there's no reason anyone would want to use it ever' joke. How original.
|
| Last edited on 2012-09-04 05:02:09 PM by MVS. |
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 05:11:44 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by Derpy BackslideOriginally posted by MVSI'd also propose we remove ZSNES and put BSNES and SNES9X in an emulator pack together.
Fixed for better accuracy.
You emulated his post inaccurately. You fail.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 05:18:59 PM |
Link |
|
Let's not get into emulator wars here, it ends the same every time - people whine about accuracy and speed of emulators, and many people are too stubborn to just download another emulator. And then someone brings up the same argument of "oh but people would leave if we dropped zsnes", but what's to say that people are worth keeping if they won't just download another emulator?
Anyway, I really don't see the harm in keeping both. It's not like the tools section is extremely crowded like the music section. Or heck, we could make some kind of a "SMWC beginner's pack" that has Lunar Magic, Addmusic, xkas, IPS programs, whatever,.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 05:56:19 PM |
Link |
|
That'd be nice... if IPSharp supported Mono. For Odin's sake, don't EVER use P/Invokes in your C# apps. They remove the cross-platform-ness of .NET and are literally worse than Hitler, making your apps worse to port, even though you could have avoided them and the hassle.
Installing .NET is too bothersome of a boondoggle when LIPS works better in Wine.
Better luck next time, and frack DllImports.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 06:36:07 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by BoomethOr heck, we could make some kind of a "SMWC beginner's pack" that has Lunar Magic, Addmusic, xkas, IPS programs, whatever,.
If we were to do this, we can't include LM. The legal stuff in the readme states it can't be packaged with anything else.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 06:44:28 PM |
Link |
|
I'd say keep them both, because some of us still use LIPS.
Originally posted by MVSI'd also propose we remove ZSNES and put BSNES and SNES9X in an emulator pack together.
This is a LIPS vs. IPSS war, not a emulator war  *shot*
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 07:16:24 PM |
Link |
|
|
Though it's basically been decided, I vote for both for the same reason that people put up the latest beta version of a program along with the last stable. If users really want the extra features, they'll take IPSS. If they don't want bugs, then LIPS is perfectly suitable for the normal user. How often to people need to patch in bulk anyway?
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 07:49:28 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by EgaddHow often to people need to patch in bulk anyway?
To be fair, if you're patching a bunch of contest entry levels or something, that feature would be very convenient and time-saving, but otherwise, you probably don't need it very often at all.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 07:53:51 PM |
Link |
|
|
Not so sure. IPSS sounds like a major improvement over LIPS, but since people think LIPS 'migth' be a better choice, hen I'll stick with the old one, even though I don't mind reverting with the new thing, if it ends up being on top.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 08:04:14 PM |
Link |
|
|
I vote for keeping both of them.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 08:18:18 PM |
Link |
|
|
Yeah, both should be kept, at least until the bugs in IPSharp are fixed. Personally, I have never used IPSharp, since I've never really needed any of its features.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-09-04 08:26:34 PM |
Link |
|
|
Alright, we'll keep both.
|
|
|
| Pages: 1 2 |
Thread Closed |
|
|
|
Forum Index - Important - Announcements - Lunar IPS vs. IPSharp |
