(09-09-2013, 01:23 PM)devina40 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, it's stretched everywhere else, and I don't think there's much we can do about it now.
I'll think about it in the future, it's not a big deal if it's included in the main archive right now.
People should just understand that all the patches are "experimental" for now.
Maybe they should, but they won't (know). Assume that this is a fact.
Also, a ws hack which only works for battles but breaks (stretches) everything else is, IMO, closer to "not working" than to "experimental", since whether users set GS window to 16:9 or to 4:3, some parts of the game will be stretched/shrunk. This is not fun.
I'm not saying it doesn't have value, since some users might still want it, or use it as a base for improvements etc, but I don't think it should be applied when checking the widescreen menu item, because it's very partial.
I expect that people either not enable ws hacks and use F6 to set GS aspect ratio per game, or check "Enable widescreen hacks", keep it checked for all games and also keep GS window at 16:9, and only if a game doesn't support 16:9 and also doesn't have a ws hack, then they'll just change the GS window to 4:3.
With this "experimental" patch, this system won't work, and the only way to "fix" it would be to also disable the ws hacks (and many users will not know to do that, instead, they'll come to the forum and complain that game XYZ only looks good in some places, regardless if they set GS to 4:3 or to 16:9).
Maybe we should put a threshold and decide what's a "working" ws hack and what is experimental.
E.g., I think/suggest that stretched HUD/fonts is OK for ws hacks. Some missing 3D objects outside the 4:3 area is also probably acceptable IMO. Maybe a bit slower rendering is also OK since it has to render more, and also ___ (fill blank here with more suggestions).
I think that these should not be acceptable as "official": any kind of crashes from the hack, hacks which result in major parts of the game stretched/shrunk, hacks which cause serious visual issues (if there are such), hacks which cause serious slow downs, etc.
I don't mind at all if we include experimental hacks together with PCSX2, but I don't think they should be enabled when users enable the ws hacks from the menu.
Instead, we should probably put them in "cheats_ws_experimental" or some similar name, and if users want to experiment with those or develop then further, then they just copy them to the official "cheats_ws" folder.
The bottom line is, that if we make stuff "official" i.e. it can be enabled at the menu, then we should have some standard, and part of this standard should, IMO, be that the patches which are enabled by this are known to work in a way which we define as acceptable.
