..:: PCSX2 Forums ::..

(02-02-2015, 09:04 PM)Blyss Sarania Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, but then we have the separate slider and which one takes precedent issue.

I mean move the entire slider to the EE/IOP page or another page like Developer Tools. The problem is the underclocking options will be removed from the Speedhacks page. But we can have a description on the Speedhacks page that underclocking is also an option and it is available on another page.

I don't think we need another page for just one feature. If we were adding even more new features then that might be a good idea.

(02-02-2015, 09:30 PM)xemnas99 Wrote: [ -> ]I mean move the entire slider to the EE/IOP page or another page like Developer Tools. The problem is the underclocking options will be removed from the Speedhacks page. But we can have a description on the Speedhacks page that underclocking is also an option and it is available on another page.

Too complicated IMO.

The discussion on github is leaning towards:

Making a special "Developer options" menu or tab, and having a tick box there. If enabled, the slider will be full range(over and underclock) else it will be as it is now.

(02-02-2015, 10:48 PM)Blyss Sarania Wrote: [ -> ]Too complicated IMO.

The discussion on github is leaning towards:

Making a special "Developer options" menu or tab, and having a tick box there. If enabled, the slider will be full range(over and underclock) else it will be as it is now.

I vote for the checkbox. The extra page isn't really needed for only one option

(02-02-2015, 10:49 PM)Nobbs66 Wrote: [ -> ]I vote for the checkbox. The extra page isn't really needed for only one option

I agree, but the logistics are somewhat tricky.

(02-02-2015, 10:48 PM)Blyss Sarania Wrote: [ -> ]Too complicated IMO.

The discussion on github is leaning towards:

Making a special "Developer options" menu or tab, and having a tick box there. If enabled, the slider will be full range(over and underclock) else it will be as it is now.

That mightn't quite prevent the users from misusing it. As I see it, the things opposite to speedhacks shouldn't be on the Speedhacks page. Some users might think that this slider is a speedhack option, so somehow it will improve the performance on their old PCs. On the other hand, if the slider is on another page, it will change the user's perspective. They will be forced to think that what this option is and they won't easily misunderstand that it's a speedhack.

By the way, it's just my opinion. Maybe I think too much.

(02-02-2015, 11:38 PM)xemnas99 Wrote: [ -> ]That mightn't quite prevent the users from misusing it. As I see it, the things opposite to speedhacks shouldn't be on the Speedhacks page. Some users might think that this slider is a speedhack option, so somehow it will improve the performance on their old PCs. On the other hand, if the slider is on another page, it will change the user's perspective. They will be forced to think that what this option is and they won't easily misunderstand that it's a speedhack.

By the way, it's just my opinion. Maybe I think too much.

I understand that, but it's so intrinsically tied to the underclock that putting it somewhere else completely is a logistical nightmare.

But if we have the checkbox and a nice warning "Note: This will drastically increase system requirements" or whatever, I think that should do.

would it be prudent to add some simple option in the speedhacks section. Something along the lines of a checkbox for (enable over/under clocking) and that has an effect on the EE slider? This is a mockup of what i mean:



I understand this may not be possible depending on how the GUI handles its slider and update calls but I wanted to share a little of my thoughts

Maybe you could use absolute percentages (i.e. 50% - 150%) and change EE cyclerate to
"EE cyclerate (Higher values require more powerful hardware)"

Edit: also the slider currently moves in the opposite direction for underclocking, might that lead to confusion?

Gregory had the idea of making a continuous slider - one that doesn't "snap" to ticks.

So e.g. you could set arbitrary values like +37% or -14% or whatever.

But if we do that then it no longer lines up with the current slider which screws with the presets and ini.

@jlwmanagement - that actually looks pretty solid, except for the description on the checkbox which I think would still get misinterpreted.