[Scummvm-devel] Touche

[Max Horn]

Am 13.02.2009 um 12:21 schrieb Gregory Montoir:

> Max Horn <max <at> quendi.de> writes:
>
>> on <http://www.scummvm.org/compatibility.php?
>> version=SVN&details=touche> I see that Touche is still on only 75%,
>> yet only "Occasional graphical glitches" are listed under issues. Are
>> these severe? Otherwise, maybe we should raise this to e.g. 85% ?
>> Granted, our percentage system is a bit fuzzy, but 75% seems low for
>> completable game with only some graphic glitches .
>
>
> Yes, 75% doesn't reflect the current status of the engine ; the  
> remaining
> graphical glitches are likely present in the original game.  
> Considering
> several workarounds were also introduced for original scripting  
> bugs, I
> think we could raise it.

Great.

> But well, that % thing just doesn't seem right to me.
> What the difference between 98 and 95 for the end user ? (IIRC the  
> first
> one is when an engine was based on original code and second on RE'ing)
> What about changing this to 3 or 5 levels ? Something like runnable /
> playable / no known issues ? Or just an appropriate link to the wiki ?

There's something to it. 3-5 levels, plus a legend explaining what  
each level means, sounds quite reasonable to me. Rough table:

0: Not (yet?) part of ScummVM (for just started engine; or we omit this)
1: Early work, sever problems, not suitable for players
2: Good enough for testing by a wider audience, but might not be  
completable, might still have missing features (e.g. no music support).
3: Completable, but has some semi-critical bugs (like may crash in  
certain places, but still completable)
4: Good to play, could have non-critical minor glitches in places,  
maybe not all versions/variants supported
5: Almost perfect, possibly with improvements over the original

This would be less confusing to both users and developers, I'd say. We  
should still include the list of known issues, as we do now, and add a  
link to the wiki pages.


What do others think?

Max