Maniac Mansion emulation inside DOTT

pucci · Post by **pucci** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:48 am

SCUMMVM can emulate Maniac Mansion from inside DOTT? ora if i use the computer to play Maniac Mansion SCUMMVM do nothing or crash?

fingolfin · Post by **fingolfin** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:57 am

No, ScummVM will not start Maniac Mansion if you use the computer in DOTT. It will not crash either. It will only show a dialog that MM would start now with the original engine etc.

Post by **eriktorbjorn** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:27 am

You can use ScummVM to play the Maniac Mansion that's included with Day of the Tentacle, but it has to be added as a separate game. (There should be a maniac folder that contains all the Maniac Mansion data files.)

zorbid · Post by **zorbid** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 7:32 pm

Couldn't this be implemented on top of the "return to the launcher" functionality being written now for the GSOC?

It would be damn cool

Edit: I posted an official feature request.

Raziel · Post by **Raziel** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:44 pm

You will loose your ongoing DOTT game then

Better would be some sort of second instance of ScummVM
(But of course this was discussed earlier and rejected(?))

fingolfin · Post by **fingolfin** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:54 pm

That was rejected, and rightfully so -- a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.
Anyway, zorbid is right, the RTL feature would make it possible (in theory) to start MM from inside DOTT -- they key trick would be to make a savestate just before leaving DOTT, to make a seamless return possible. However, the launcher/main code would then also have to be modified, to deal with this special situation: I.e. we would have to add code that allows a "returning" engine to trigger the immediate start of another game.
This involves all sorts of subtle and very annoying problems. Like, does the user already have maniac mansion in his game settings? one or multiple? If so, use one of those configs? or create a new on-the-fly target for the MM files in the directory DOTT is in --- well, IF those files are in the DOTT dir, so that has to be checked as well. etc. etc.

Don't get me wrong, all of these issues are solvable, but it will require some dedicated work, and maybe some not so pretty changes to the core code... So we'd have to weigh this against the (IMO rather small) return we get in exchange.

Whatever, I'll worry about this once the RTL code is working and merged in trunk, not before

.

clem · Post by **clem** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:57 pm

fingolfin wrote:That was rejected, and rightfully so -- a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.

A non-serious suggestion: just save the game and boot the user back to the gui - as an easter egg, the computer in DOTT this time doesn't have maniac mansion installed, but ScummVM!

(on a pretty unrelated note, I remember playing the Fallout 1 demo in dos days, and a computer there, when examined, had Fallout 1 installed)

Ceri Cat · Post by **Ceri Cat** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:36 am

fingolfin wrote:That was rejected, and rightfully so -- a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.
Anyway, zorbid is right, the RTL feature would make it possible (in theory) to start MM from inside DOTT -- they key trick would be to make a savestate just before leaving DOTT, to make a seamless return possible. However, the launcher/main code would then also have to be modified, to deal with this special situation: I.e. we would have to add code that allows a "returning" engine to trigger the immediate start of another game.
This involves all sorts of subtle and very annoying problems. Like, does the user already have maniac mansion in his game settings? one or multiple? If so, use one of those configs? or create a new on-the-fly target for the MM files in the directory DOTT is in --- well, IF those files are in the DOTT dir, so that has to be checked as well. etc. etc.

Don't get me wrong, all of these issues are solvable, but it will require some dedicated work, and maybe some not so pretty changes to the core code... So we'd have to weigh this against the (IMO rather small) return we get in exchange.

Whatever, I'll worry about this once the RTL code is working and merged in trunk, not before .

I always figured that was essentially what DOTT did, did a snapshot save and when you quit reloaded it and set a flag to Bernard to trigger his response.

Collector · Post by **Collector** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:28 am

fingolfin wrote:a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.

Just out of curiosity, why? DOSBox places as much emphases on portability as ScummVM and like ScummVM relies on SDL, too, yet you can have multiple instances of it. Not doubting, just wondering.

hippy dave · Post by **hippy dave** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 3:41 am

Ceri Cat wrote:I always figured that was essentially what DOTT did, did a snapshot save and when you quit reloaded it and set a flag to Bernard to trigger his response.

nah dott just froze in the background after running maniac mansion, so when mm exited, dott would just restart from where it was, still all there in memory, with no need for a save state.

md5 · Post by **md5** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 4:34 am

Collector wrote:
fingolfin wrote:a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.
Just out of curiosity, why? DOSBox places as much emphases on portability as ScummVM and like ScummVM relies on SDL, too, yet you can have multiple instances of it. Not doubting, just wondering.

DOSBox requires far too much processing power to run on handheld platforms or gaming consoles - i.e. Windows Mobile, Dreamcast, Symbian, iphone, PSP, Playstation 2 etc etc. It runs on Desktop operating systems, so the portability requirements are of course vastly different

fingolfin · Post by **fingolfin** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:12 am

Collector wrote:
fingolfin wrote:a "second instance of ScummVM" can not be implemented portably.
Just out of curiosity, why? DOSBox places as much emphases on portability as ScummVM and like ScummVM relies on SDL, too, yet you can have multiple instances of it. Not doubting, just wondering.

That's a different thing: Yes, of course you can run two instances of ScummVM (or DOSBox) at the same time. On *some* operating systems, that is -- but there is no code in ScummVM (or DOSBox) for launching such a second instance! Launching programs is highly non-portable (so we'd have to create an abstraction layer for it), and on some systems, you simply can not run two programs at the same time, so it is out of question.

BTW, DOSBox puts emphasis on portability, like we do, but ScummVM still supports far more systems

.

zorbid · Post by **zorbid** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 8:14 am

fingolfin wrote:... all sorts of subtle and very annoying problems...

... some dedicated work, and maybe some not so pretty changes ...

You mean that it will require Highly Sloppy yet Imaginative and Kinda Creative Ad Hoc code?

I know you love that secretly (but I wont tell the rest of the team, I swear...)

hippy dave · Post by **hippy dave** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:05 am

md5 wrote:DOSBox requires far too much processing power to run on handheld platforms or gaming consoles - i.e. Windows Mobile, Dreamcast, Symbian, iphone, PSP, Playstation 2 etc etc. It runs on Desktop operating systems, so the portability requirements are of course vastly different

not to nitpick

but it's available for psp at least
edit: ooh and dreamcast

md5 · Post by **md5** » Mon Jun 30, 2008 11:23 am

hippy dave wrote:
md5 wrote:DOSBox requires far too much processing power to run on handheld platforms or gaming consoles - i.e. Windows Mobile, Dreamcast, Symbian, iphone, PSP, Playstation 2 etc etc. It runs on Desktop operating systems, so the portability requirements are of course vastly different
not to nitpick but it's available for psp at least
edit: ooh and dreamcast

As an official port? Don't think so