Discussing the possibilities of the "Perfect" rating

[FlatOut]

sorry, I was being facetious.

There may be some merit to that, but as mentioned there will be a lot of data work and testing to do as a result, as we will have to go through all the games marked as playable (which is 94% of them now) to filter out what ones are "playable" and what ones are "playable without annoying issues" and that won't be a 5 minute job as we will pretty much need to complete the game in order to find out of there are issues in later levels which may cause the frustrations you are on about. Given games take 10-20 hours to complete (lets say 10 for a best case scenario), of the 2436 that will take potentially 15,000-24,360 hours to complete (taking in to account a few of those games are puzzle games and simple games). I honestly don't think we have the man power for that, or if it's even worth it.

There's no rush. Untested games can be left as playable, and the limit of completing a game for a rating can be dropped. You can tell if a game is better than just playable within an hour. If a major bug is discoverd the rating can be lowered again unless it can be easily solved.

[refraction]

But that's the thing, they will stay like that for a very very long time, making the new rating pointless as it will barely get used, ever. I dunno if you've noticed, but there's only been about 100-200 games tested in the last year, at that rate it would take 10-20 years to bring it up to speed, I can't see people being overly bothered with PCSX2 in 10-20 years. If we were to implement this, it would spend a good year or so before anything apart from a handful of games showed this new setting, so for a very long time people are still going to have to struggle with the "playable" rating and potential bugs/tweaking.

In short IMHO, it's a nice idea but not something that can be executed in a reasonable time.

[FlatOut]

But that's the thing, they will stay like that for a very very long time, making the new rating pointless as it will barely get used, ever. I dunno if you've noticed, but there's only been about 100-200 games tested in the last year, ...

I assume that means the compatibility reports posted here, that doesn't mean more games haven't been tested. A lot of games don't even have threads there, and requesting a new one can take a month and a half(and counting) for it to finally be created...

[refraction]

I assume that means the compatibility reports posted here, that doesn't mean more games haven't been tested. A lot of games don't even have threads there, and requesting a new one can take a month and a half(and counting) for it to finally be created...

New games don't help our current list of games, at all.  Yes new ones can be added, but it's usually done within a few days of request if all the information is present and correct.

The biggest problem we have is nobody wants to test the games that are in the list. We made the list public a while back because we lacked our own internal testers, they had all moved on with their lives or just didn't want to do it anymore, or are just far too busy, so we figured making it public would let our users contribute and help do those reports for us, unfortunately the response has been...underwhelming to say the least. There has been a couple of people who have tested a few games, which is great, but it's nowhere near the volume we need to keep the list up to date in a fashionable time.

[FlatOut]

New games don't help our current list of games, at all.  Yes new ones can be added, but it's usually done within a few days of request if all the information is present and correct.

The biggest problem we have is nobody wants to test the games that are in the list. We made the list public a while back because we lacked our own internal testers, they had all moved on with their lives or just didn't want to do it anymore, or are just far too busy, so we figured making it public would let our users contribute and help do those reports for us, unfortunately the response has been...underwhelming to say the least. There has been a couple of people who have tested a few games, which is great, but it's nowhere near the volume we need to keep the list up to date in a fashionable time.

You should ask for more help from users on the frontpage. There are also many games already on the list, but it's divided by region and often just the NTSC-U thread is available, which requires PAL and NTSC-J users to request a new thread. It's a lot easier on the wiki, you can just add your report and mention the region in your report. And from what I've seen it's been getting more reports, even though users might miss the wiki altogether when visiting this site at first.

[prafull]

I agree completely with refraction on this. Perfect rating requires too much man power and too much time. Infact if I try to check only my games collection of 400+ playable games it will require more than one year to finish all games If I somehow manage to finish one game per day (which is impossible). Practically speaking even 10 active users will find it hard to properly test and finish only my own 400+ playable games collection. Also by the time we finish testing all games with 1.4 we may have already moved on to something like 2.0 release and old reports will become useless.

[Blyss Sarania]

Don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way Just commenting on the situation.

What I'm hearing is "Well Perfect/Excellent might be a good idea but because it won't happen overnight it's a bad idea" - you realize if we thought that way in the past we wouldn't have an emulator right? I think that's a pretty silly reason not to move forward on something, just because it's a lot of work/will take some time to flesh out. It doesn't need to be done overnight. Nor should it be expected.

If we leave things as they are the hole only gets deeper - i.e. we cement ourselves into this way forever because the longer it is this way the more work to change it. If that's what we want then I guess that's fine, but yeah.

[refraction]

Don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way

you realize if we thought that way in the past we wouldn't have an emulator right?

What makes you say that?

I think Prafulls point really hit it home. Amending the compatibility list to reflect the new system will take a long time to do, but there is a chance (especially with recent progress as a base) that we could be 1/10th of the way through it, 1/4 if I'm being kind, a new release will be out and its highly likely all them man hours could be completely wasted from upgrades and regressions, so they will all need testing again.

The biggest problem here is the emulator will advance quicker than we can update the list, so it will be a forever losing battle.

[FlatOut]

Don't take what I'm about to say the wrong way Just commenting on the situation.

What I'm hearing is "Well Perfect/Excellent might be a good idea but because it won't happen overnight it's a bad idea" - you realize if we thought that way in the past we wouldn't have an emulator right? I think that's a pretty silly reason not to move forward on something, just because it's a lot of work/will take some time to flesh out. It doesn't need to be done overnight. Nor should it be expected.

If we leave things as they are the hole only gets deeper - i.e. we cement ourselves into this way forever because the longer it is this way the more work to change it. If that's what we want then I guess that's fine, but yeah.

And just because a game hasn't been upgraded to a rank beyond playable, isn't a bad thing. Playable will still mean playable. It would at least offer a better indicator for the games that have been tested.

[Blyss Sarania]

What makes you say that?

I think Prafulls point really hit it home.  Amending the compatibility list to reflect the new system will take a long time to do, but there is a chance (especially with recent progress as a base) that we could be 1/10th of the way through it, 1/4 if I'm being kind, a new release will be out and its highly likely all them man hours could be completely wasted from upgrades and regressions, so they will all need testing again.

The biggest problem here is the emulator will advance quicker than we can update the list, so it will be a forever losing battle.

I just meant that it took a long long time for PCSX2 to mature to where it is, and if people had started out by saying "Man this is pointless it will take years" then we wouldn't be here.

I do agree that's a problem - but it's one we already face. Many of the results in the compat list are for older versions, some very old. That shows something needs to change right there. I'm not saying this is the answer (in fact it seems to be the anti answer as far as work) but yeah, we already have a bit of a situation.

And just because a game hasn't been upgraded to a rank beyond playable, isn't a bad thing.  Playable will still mean playable. It would at least offer a better indicator for the games that have been tested.

That's what I think anyway.