Cheating, the easy way
#91
So all in all you need a pnach in order for CE to work? Seems like a waste if you ask. Might as well get/find codes ofr the game. This way is a more definitive way of cheating. But its is a nice alternative however.
I5 3570k 3.4ghz| 4GB R9 290| 8GB DDR3
Reply

Sponsored links

#92
edit so: I found the value of this item, it will be the same every time for the game? based on the CRC?

//Jr.'s Requiem Special Attack
patch=1,EE,204CBEB0,word,000003E7

Would that be right for a value of 999?

(05-21-2013, 05:59 AM)fade2black001 Wrote: So all in all you need a pnach in order for CE to work? Seems like a waste if you ask. Might as well get/find codes ofr the game. This way is a more definitive way of cheating. But its is a nice alternative however.


No? The point is to make a pnach from cheat engine values for codes that don't exist or that people want customized.
CPU: i5 3570k @ 4.2 | RAM: 8GB DDR3 | GPU: 1GB Radeon HD5550 @ Stock
Running: 1.1.0.5764
Reply
#93
Oh I see. Well that's pretty neat then.
I5 3570k 3.4ghz| 4GB R9 290| 8GB DDR3
Reply
#94
(05-21-2013, 05:59 AM)fade2black001 Wrote: So all in all you need a pnach in order for CE to work? Seems like a waste if you ask. Might as well get/find codes ofr the game. This way is a more definitive way of cheating. But its is a nice alternative however.

no, just wait, my video is uploading

if you look at the first post, I copied the patch line, just for proof
Reply
#95
I'll check it out in the morning man. Thanks for the vid and the time you put into it. I haven't even seen it yet...
I5 3570k 3.4ghz| 4GB R9 290| 8GB DDR3
Reply
#96
Yay, I made some codes that work!
CPU: i5 3570k @ 4.2 | RAM: 8GB DDR3 | GPU: 1GB Radeon HD5550 @ Stock
Running: 1.1.0.5764
Reply
#97
(05-21-2013, 06:23 AM)fade2black001 Wrote: I'll check it out in the morning man. Thanks for the vid and the time you put into it. I haven't even seen it yet...

it's up now
Reply
#98
I get it but it didn't work like that when I tried it though. I know how to use CE but guess I'll try it again on some game as a test.

Edit: It works just like you showed in your vid. I do not know why it was bugging out when I first tried it though.
I5 3570k 3.4ghz| 4GB R9 290| 8GB DDR3
Reply
#99
So I'm trying to search for Anima levels (being able to lock them at 1 would be nice) but I find the values, but changing them immediately has the value changed back. Am I finding like copy addresses? Not sure what I'm doing wrong, these are the values, I just can't seem to modify them.
CPU: i5 3570k @ 4.2 | RAM: 8GB DDR3 | GPU: 1GB Radeon HD5550 @ Stock
Running: 1.1.0.5764
Reply
(05-21-2013, 10:54 PM)Gvaz Wrote: So I'm trying to search for Anima levels (being able to lock them at 1 would be nice) but I find the values, but changing them immediately has the value changed back. Am I finding like copy addresses? Not sure what I'm doing wrong, these are the values, I just can't seem to modify them.

Some games you'll find have separate display addresses... that is, it will copy that value to another spot in memory before displaying it. Or will copy the information to another spot for some other temporary reason.

For example, many years ago I was trying to create a high JP cheat for Final Fantasy 5. I used the displayed "you gained X" amount of points via the victory screen as my gage to grab numbers from. Well, in FF5 that number is copied from the value of the monster group, the "real" value is a different address and is applied to your party BEFORE (or was it after?) it's actually displayed.

Long story short, all I managed to do was capture the text change and not the actual JP number. Took awhile to figure it out. It's very rare (but not unheard of) for values to not be stored the same way they are displayed (another example from my past is how Mega Man Legends stored Zenny value, which has an extra 0 padded at the end that isn't part of the real value).

My advice, try attacking the problem from another angle. If you're modifying a value one way, look for another way to do so and monitor your results. If all else fails, use relative searches instead of precise (less than, more than, equal to). It takes longer and you'll likely have to hand test far more codes, but you're also much less likely to miss the code you're looking for.
[Image: 2748844.png]
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)