Idea to safeguard against bad demos

Hi group. I will take my time out from being contentious and insulting to throw out an idea that may be utter hogwash or may be good. I hope someone who knows more about this than I do can offer some input. No matter how complex a game is, it is only really making a certain variety of requests or calls to the hardware it is running on, yes? To oversimplify, maybe it uses all but 12 of the Direct 3D calls, or something like that. How hard would it be for the authors of a game to create a single executable 'compatability' file that made all of the same variety of requests that the software makes of the hardware, but just enough for you to find out if your hardware could deal wth it? It could either just say 'yes or no' to the whole thing, or it could possibly give you a more detailed report ala 'your hardware failed the video test'. I don't know how compilers work, but I imagine they could report on the variety of different requests the software makes and maybe this report could be used to generate the executable. The executable would be small, hopefully only a couple hundred K at most, and before commiting to a huge and expensive or time-consuming download, you could find out if it was going to run on your computer. The company could have a link to the download appear if the result was yes and/or possibly a bug report form, if the answer is no, that you could fill in or that took some info from the registry or MSINFO32 or something. That way they could find out about non-compatable hardware and deal with it before releasing the product, etc. Anyone think this is a good idea or total rubbish? Any programmers know about the realities of this that I haven't a clue about? Anyone just want to call me names and question my lineage or maybe poke me in the eye with a sharp stick? ~daxe "religion is remedial spirituality" -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! -----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:32:26 -0500, "Daxe Rexford" > Anyone think this is a good idea or total rubbish? Any programmers know >about the realities of this that I haven't a clue about? Anyone just want >to call me names and question my lineage or maybe poke me in the eye with a >sharp stick? Hi Daxe, I just wanted to say I agree with what you're saying. I don't know anything about programming tho, so maybe it just can't be done. I'm sure they couldn't do anything that would assure 100% compatibility, there are too many differences from one system to another, like sound cards, game cards, controllers, etc... But they could at least do something that's looking for, say, the version of your directx installation and things like video memory, main memory, etc... I'm sure most of us know when a game requires a 3D accelerated video adapter. We usually know if a title will work with a 3DFX only, or if it's direct3D compatible, etc... But I know many of my friends did download 3DFX demos thinking their Diamond Stealth 3D could run it... You know, you can't always rely on the salesperson to tell you your 3D card is worth sh*t when it comes to 3D ***... Now where have I put my sharp stick, I know I have one somewhere... ;o) A. Renault

It's 'Daxe'. 'Help' menu there is a 'Product Updates' pick. Selecting this will transport you to a web-page where you can update your operating system! I've done it plenty of times, thanks. I am running Win98 with MSIE5/OE b2. That's not really what I meant. I meant a game company could make a very small executable that used the same memory addresses and function calls (or whatever) as the large downloadable demo. It would be different for each demo, since each program uses different system calls, etc. You would execute the small file and it would tell you if your system would run the demo so you wouldn't have to download it if it wouldn't run it. Something that just checked your hardware against a master list wouldn't do the job because it is often the combination of parts you have that causes the problem, not the parts themselves. If the small executable ran each of the different instructions that the demo used and checked that they ALL returned the expected value and didn't crash the machine, then you would know the Demo would run correctly and could go ahead with the download. daxe -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! -----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------

Hey Dake, Sure, no problem, I'm on it. Just kidding ;-) But seriously... Microsoft is doing this now using Windows '98 with IE4. From IE4's 'Help' menu there is a 'Product Updates' pick. Selecting this will transport you to a web-page where you can update your operating system! Here's how it works. An applet is loaded that informs you: This program can determine what components are installed on your computer, and whether new components, upgrades, or enhancements are available specific to your computer. This check is done without sending any information to Microsoft. Would you like to check now? Clicking 'Yes' will run a check of your system (I assume the registry) and provide you with a list of updates available for your Windows system. It can tell you which ones are installed and even perform uninstalls for you! If you've got Win'98, give it a whirl! Regards, Steve

Quoted text (42 lines)

>Hi group. > I will take my time out from being contentious and insulting to throw >out an idea that may be utter hogwash or may be good. I hope someone who >knows more about this than I do can offer some input. > No matter how complex a game is, it is only really making a certain >variety of requests or calls to the hardware it is running on, yes? To >oversimplify, maybe it uses all but 12 of the Direct 3D calls, or something >like that. > How hard would it be for the authors of a game to create a single >executable 'compatability' file that made all of the same variety of >requests that the software makes of the hardware, but just enough for you to >find out if your hardware could deal wth it? It could either just say 'yes >or no' to the whole thing, or it could possibly give you a more detailed >report ala 'your hardware failed the video test'. > I don't know how compilers work, but I imagine they could report on the >variety of different requests the software makes and maybe this report could >be used to generate the executable. The executable would be small, >hopefully only a couple hundred K at most, and before commiting to a huge >and expensive or time-consuming download, you could find out if it was going >to run on your computer. > The company could have a link to the download appear if the result was >yes and/or possibly a bug report form, if the answer is no, that you could >fill in or that took some info from the registry or MSINFO32 or something. >That way they could find out about non-compatable hardware and deal with it >before releasing the product, etc. > Anyone think this is a good idea or total rubbish? Any programmers know >about the realities of this that I haven't a clue about? Anyone just want >to call me names and question my lineage or maybe poke me in the eye with a >sharp stick? >~daxe >"religion is remedial spirituality" >-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- > http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! >-----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------

On Tue, 26 Jan 1999 21:32:26 -0500, "Daxe Rexford" > How hard would it be for the authors of a game to create a single >executable 'compatability' file that made all of the same variety of >requests that the software makes of the hardware, but just enough for you to >find out if your hardware could deal wth it? One question - how many software manufacturers do you know that would release a program which might STOP people downloading their advertising (presuming the software test program was correctly "calibrated")? Just think about the claimed "minimum hardware" requirements on boxes to see how accurately it would probably perform. Cheers! John

>One question - how many software manufacturers do you know that would >release a program which might STOP people downloading their >advertising (presuming the software test program was correctly >"calibrated")? If it doesn't run, it wouldn't be much of an ad. Yeah, I guess it is a little idealistic. I forgot about the PT Barnum rule. ~daxe -----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==---------- http://www.newsfeeds.com/ The Largest Usenet Servers in the World! -----------== Over 66,000 Groups, Plus a Dedicated Binaries Server ==----------

Very cool idea...I much prefer a 30k download to check things out before a 30Mb commitment. > You would execute > the small file and it would tell you if your system would run the demo so > you wouldn't have to download it if it wouldn't run it. -- Marc J. Nelson SimRacing Online - http://www.simracing.com * No animals were harmed in the making of this e-mail *