Fire One (boxster)

diabolik · Post by **diabolik** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 5:36 pm

http://marp.retrogames.com/index.cgi?mo ... lines=9999

http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/d/0/8/cw ... mame70.zip

"Not an AlphaMAME 0.62 or later INP file"

Chad · Post by **Chad** » Sat Feb 28, 2004 11:03 pm

after checking the frame size it looks to be a mame later than mame70, i tried mame78 and it worked.

boxster · Post by **boxster** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 1:55 pm

I submitted that link with tgmame70, not 60. When I checked it yesterday, it still said tgmame70.

Even the link says it was submitted with 70:

http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/d/0/8/cw ... mame70.zip

Am I missing something?

Just curious. Thanks.

Chad · Post by **Chad** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:47 pm

The name of the filename is the name that you originally submited the mame version for. So if the link is http://marp.retrogames.com/inp/d/0/8/cw ... mame70.zip you DID submit it as a tgmame70 recording originally.

For filename preservation marp doesn't rename the filename when the version changes, i.e. the link it still the same even though the version on the search page shows mame78. This sucks but it just means "always look at the description before trying to playback a recording", i.e. don't go by the end of the filename as the recorded version always. If you have a script that automates the mame version, then just change the name of the file from cwl_fireone_3066_tgmame70.zip to cwl_fireone_3066_mame78.zip

boxster · Post by **boxster** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 5:56 pm

Actually, that was my point. The original thread in this post says, "Not an AlphaMAME 0.62 or later INP file".

0.70 is obviously later than 0.62, so I wasn't sure what the issue was with that INP. That's my question. I'm confused about why this INP was at issue in the first place.

I guess maybe a better way to ask it would be thus: does tgmame70 satisfy the "AlphaMAME 0.62 or later" criterion, or does recording now require AlphaMAME or one of its derivatives?

I'm now using WolfMAME, but I was under the impression that tgmame derivatives were acceptable, as well.

Edit: fixed wording

diabolik · Post by **diabolik** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 6:33 pm

boxster wrote:Actually, that was my point. The original thread in this post says, "Not an AlphaMAME 0.62 or later INP file".

That's the error message Alphamame 0.70 gave me, when I tried to playback your INP.

I guess maybe a better way to ask it would be thus: does tgmame70 satisfy the "AlphaMAME 0.62 or later" criterion

Yes, it does, but Alphamame 0.70 couldn't playback your INP, because it wasn't an Alphamame recording.

I'm now using WolfMAME, but I was under the impression that tgmame derivatives were acceptable, as well.

I think you are misunderstanding something here... Only function of my post was to inform the editors that I couldn't playback your recording using tgmame70.

Chad · Post by **Chad** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 7:14 pm

boxster wrote:I'm confused about why this INP was at issue in the first place.

It's submited as using the wrong mame version, i.e. it was recorded with a non alpha/tg mame but you submited it as tgmame70.

boxster · Post by **boxster** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 9:32 pm

Ok, I understand.

"It's submited as using the wrong mame version, i.e. it was recorded with a non alpha/tg mame but you submited it as tgmame70."

I submitted several INPs within a few days of that one, all recorded with tgmame70, and all confirmed, so I'm not sure what happened with that one. Weird. I don't recall using anything other than tgmame or WolfMAME installed for ages, though it's possible, I suppose.

"I think you are misunderstanding something here... Only function of my post was to inform the editors that I couldn't playback your recording using tgmame70."

No, I do understand that that was the intent of your post. I was mainly trying to determine if something had changed (I'm away from MARP for significant periods of time) and if AlphaMAME and its derivatives were now the only acceptable versions for MARP. I also didn't initially understand that tgmame and AlphaMAME are effectively the same thing for confirmation purposes.

Weehawk · Post by **Weehawk** » Sun Feb 29, 2004 10:29 pm

boxster wrote:No, I do understand that that was the intent of your post

I think most of us that regularly use this forum understood.

boxster wrote:...and if AlphaMAME and its derivatives were now the only acceptable versions for MARP

Unfortunately, no.

boxster wrote:I also didn't initially understand that tgmame and AlphaMAME are effectively the same thing for confirmation purposes

If I understand the history correctly, Mark Longridge initially created a tgMAME, disabling cheats and pausing during recording etc... for more secure submissions to TG and MARP, later Barry created the more sophisticated alphaMAME which encrypted the inps.

When you choose the alphaMAME option (.62 through .70) the MARP submission script uses the term "tgmameXX" in the inps filename. I guess a carryover from Mark's previous version.

boxster · Post by **boxster** » Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:59 pm

"When you choose the alphaMAME option (.62 through .70) the MARP submission script uses the term "tgmameXX" in the inps filename. I guess a carryover from Mark's previous version."

Ok, that makes sense. I was probably using AlphaMAME at the time, but I couldn't remember when I started using AlphaMAME. I've always just used tgmame, AlphaMAME, etc., or another "tournament-friendly" version for MARP in general so that I don't have to switch back and forth or keep various versions installed.

I know that there's been a lot of talk about only allowing AlphaMAME and other "secure" MAME versions and wanted to make sure that this hadn't become a requirement while I've been away from MARP.

Thanks to all of you for the info. Sorry for the 20 questions, but I'd rather fully understand the issues than inadvertently submit a bunch of invalid INPs!