Any good guides for GINA?

[Stabulous]

I plan on playing an enchanter on green and GINA would be super helpful for buff and mez timers and whatnot, but I have no experience whatsoever with using it. Without upsetting the purists too much, is there a good tutorial or guide anywhere that gives you a step by step list of how to use it? Any links or info given is appreciated, thanks.

[Deathrydar]

What is GINA?

[El-Hefe]

What is GINA?

Cheater program.

[Deathrydar]

Cheater program.

Why would someone put that on here when the devs could see it?

[kylok]

Why would someone put that on here when the devs could see it?

Because it's a log parser and it's allowed afaik. Hefe is exercising hyperbole.

[El-Hefe]

Because it's a log parser and it's allowed afaik. Hefe is exercising hyperbole.

Ya got me.

In a perfect world though...

[kylok]

Ya got me.

In a perfect world though...

To be perfectly honest I could care less if log parsers are allowed or bant. I'm just not willing to entertain the implied security risks of enforcing that kind of ban - assuming the log file is still enabled (which I feel it should be).

[Deathrydar]

What would someone need/use a log file for?

Sorry for stupid questions. I tried to ask these questions in the other GINA thread but no one answered.

[El-Hefe]

Just another one of those dumb unclassic things IMO. If there was a way to encrypt log files without it getting too big brother it’d go a long way toward people actually playing the game as intended.

[aaezil]

Idk but it sounds

Not classic

[El-Hefe]

What would someone need/use a log file for?

Sorry for stupid questions. I tried to ask these questions in the other GINA thread but no one answered.

To tell you when your buffs are going to disappear, when your spells are going to be ready to cast, how long until the mob you’re camping will be up.

Basically all the things Rogean and Nilbog went out of their way to remove from the UI.

[kylok]

Log files are great for all sorts of things that would require a large data set. Attempting to reverse engineer the AC formula, verifying dps (how much worse is a rusty long sword than a cracked staff), other stuff I can't think of at the moment. In the OPs context it's tracking spell durations. So the program looks like "you begin to cast mesmerize" and then starts a timer for a duration of that spell (which the user manually enters i am assuming). It could also provide an alert if it reads "your mesmerization spell has worn off" in the log file. I don't know if Gina does this, but other programs would read the log looking for "you have entered so-and-so zone" then pull up a map of that zone, then look for a location from /loc and plot that on the map - giving you a real time plot of where you are in that zone (useful if you bind /loc to a movement key). You can do a lot with the log file. Also, old log files are where a lot of our community resources come from for re-creating quests, mechanics, etc. Logs are good, but also powerful

[Deathrydar]

Log files are great for all sorts of things that would require a large data set. Attempting to reverse engineer the AC formula, verifying dps (how much worse is a rusty long sword than a cracked staff), other stuff I can't think of at the moment. In the OPs context it's tracking spell durations. So the program looks like "you begin to cast mesmerize" and then starts a timer for a duration of that spell (which the user manually enters i am assuming). It could also provide an alert if it reads "your mesmerization spell has worn off" in the log file. I don't know if Gina does this, but other programs would read the log looking for "you have entered so-and-so zone" then pull up a map of that zone, then look for a location from /loc and plot that on the map - giving you a real time plot of where you are in that zone (useful if you bind /loc to a movement key). You can do a lot with the log file. Also, old log files are where a lot of our community resources come from for re-creating quests, mechanics, etc. Logs are good, but also powerful

Oh.....so it's cheating.

[Tenlaar]

What do people use logs for besides GINA? I'm honestly wondering. I've never used the logging feature in all my years of EQ, both on Live and on P1999. I have a hard time seeing how logging adds enough to the player experience to be left intact if it is mostly just being used to run what is basically a de facto cheat program outside the client.

Fair question.

I keep logs to see:

how many kills per level
what the average loot drops are for specific mobs
what my skill levels were (before they got displayed in the UI)
check /auc sellers and prices for an item
parse damage with different weapons
the frequency of mob placeholders
etc.

[Chortles Snort|eS]

Cheater program.

[El-Hefe]

Oh.....so it's cheating.

It’s like hiring an expensive lawyer that finds the best loopholes so your business pays zero in taxes at the end of the year. Not technically cheating, but a total scummy fat cat move that apparently everyone of any sort of means is already doing.

[Mblake81]

Idk but it sounds

Not classic

neither here nor there, one of our guildmates had a parser but you couldn't see it while in game. It didn't place overlays/ give real time readouts (You couldn't window EQ). All it did was parse DPS that you could take a look at after exiting the game.

So parsers were classic (around kunark is when my anecdote took place, specifically remember him parsing us in Karnors at captain camp) but having on screen displays etc are certainly not. If someone can provide screenshots of such a thing then there can be no argument. I haven't seen one posted yet.

The guys who are all about their GINA info have made the connection that because parsers were there then GINA is cool. Pound Sand otherwise.

Edit: For the guys saying they did their own programs for timers, how did you get them to work while EQ was not in a window, were their any conflicts or was this done on an extra computer?

[Ferahgo]

Guide? Just ask someone for their GINA package files they spent hours creating. No reason to reinvent the wheel.

[Tecmos Deception]

Idk but it sounds

Not classic

It's pretty classic. I had log readers back in the day.

Logs are amazing for finding your corpse when you wake up hungover, finding the name of some guy who were supposed to get back with about whatever, searching for auctions after afking in EC for 6 hours, learning about combat and resists, tracking loot, all kinds of whatnot like that.

[Videri]

What is GINA?

GINA can give you timers, overlays, and audio alerts by reading your log file. Log file readers such as parsers and GINA are allowed and, as far as we know, not possible to disallow. The debate rages as to whether they make the game more fun, but they can make it pretty convenient.

Check out this remarkable example: https://youtu.be/sRf5AuS0MLA

[Tenlaar]

It's pretty classic. I had log readers back in the day.

You had log readers...that created graphical overlays to display real time game information on top of the game?

[kylok]

I'm not sure why people are upset specifically about the overlays. I can't prove it, but I'd be incredibly surprised if some of the people who used log parsers in 1999/2000 didn't also have that information in real time on a second monitor/computer.

[El-Hefe]

I'm not sure why people are upset specifically about the overlays. I can't prove it, but I'd be incredibly surprised if some of the people who used log parsers in 1999/2000 didn't also have that information in real time on a second monitor/computer.


Cause it’s pretty much cheating. Lol

You guys can rationalize it all you want, but people don’t like it because you’re cheating and they don’t want to have to cheat as well to be on an even playing field.

[kylok]

I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what cheating is. Imo cheating would be MQ, ShowEQ, other stuff that injects code and/or provide information that is otherwise not made available to you. I don't feel that setting a timer for a spell with a known duration fits that criteria.

[Vexenu]

Log parsing was definitely a thing, although even that was really only done by a small group of people who wanted to figure out how AC worked or see how much damage their raid force was putting out. But most players were not parsing logs for any purpose whatsoever. Graphical overlays and real-time reading of logs was definitely NOT a thing that I ever heard of in the classic era. I challenge anyone to find evidence of such a thing from old websites or forum posts.

[Ferahgo]

I don't believe it to be a cheat but only being resourceful with the log data. You could potentially create 'buff timers' using Windows 10 Alarms & Clock. GINA is just far more efficient.

[Videri]

I don’t think anyone is saying overlays and buff timers and audio triggers were classic.

Even if we assume the devs don’t want us to use GINA, it’s my understanding they can’t enforce a rule against it.

As a Mac player, I can’t use it anyway. :p

[El-Hefe]

I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what cheating is. Imo cheating would be MQ, ShowEQ, other stuff that injects code and/or provide information that is otherwise not made available to you. I don't feel that setting a timer for a spell with a known duration fits that criteria.

Like I said, you can rationalize it all you want. Cheaters often times don’t think what they do is unfair.

But that shit is cheating and that’s why people don’t like it.

[Donkey Hotay]

Here's some irony that only GINA users are capable of understanding:

This project is in part possible due to preserved logs from the classic era.

[El-Hefe]

Here's some irony that only GINA users are capable of understanding:

This project is in part possible due to preserved logs from the classic era.

Neat fact.

Still cheating.

[kylok]

Like I said, you can rationalize it all you want. Cheaters often times don’t think what they do is unfair.

But that shit is cheating and that’s why people don’t like it.

Pardon me, but I would argue that you, and people who share your opinion, are upset about a YouTube video in which you saw real time graphical overlays. I, like most other players here, had no idea this existed before seeing this video. I highly doubt that another player using this program drastically impacts your gameplay experience. I have never in my tenure on this server been asked before joining a group or guild, as a condition of joining, if I used a log parser. I'd argue that the vaaast majority of players not only do not care about this topic, but are completely unaware of it as well since the impact on gameplay is so small. An attentive player can keep track of their own buffs/spells/raid mob cooldowns without this program.

Would you please explain to me how having these timers and alerts provides an unfair advantage to a player since they utilize information that is made available to every player?

And to be clear, I do not and have not ever used this program - I'm attempting to defend this on principle.

[Graahle]

Gina bars are pretty. Therefore not cheating. Pretty sure GINA wasn't even a thing last I played, but seeing them in recent P99 videos piqued my interest.

Setting timers is not cheating btw.

[Chortles Snort|eS]

inB4 disAbleD PrioR 2 GreeN laUncH 🚀
HeartY siP

[Graahle]

inB4 disAbleD PrioR 2 GreeN laUncH 🚀
HeartY siP

pras

[El-Hefe]

Here's some irony that only GINA users are capable of understanding:

This project is in part possible due to preserved logs from the classic era.

Pardon me, but I would argue that you, and people who share your opinion, are upset about a YouTube video in which you saw real time graphical overlays. I, like most other players here, had no idea this existed before seeing this video. I highly doubt that another player using this program drastically impacts your gameplay experience. I have never in my tenure on this server been asked before joining a group or guild, as a condition of joining, if I used a log parser. I'd argue that the vaaast majority of players not only do not care about this topic, but are completely unaware of it as well since the impact on gameplay is so small. An attentive player can keep track of their own buffs/spells/raid mob cooldowns without this program.

Would you please explain to me how having these timers and alerts provides an unfair advantage to a player since they utilize information that is made available to every player?

And to be clear, I do not and have not ever used this program - I'm attempting to defend this on principle.

They’re 3rd party programs that read game data and use said data to display information in real time that was not intended to be easily displayed by games chosen UI.

If altering the UI on Green could be considered cheating, GINA is 100% cheating.

Like I said, you can rationalize it all you want. Most cheaters do.

[solleks]

I like to let my buffs wear off all the way and have someone ask me multiple time before replenish. More mana efficient than an elderly robot hooker telling me before they even wear off.

[Donkey Hotay]

Two scoops, two terms, two quotes, too rekt.

Anyways OP, you'll have to get someone's collection or make your own. It's an awkward program to use but you should be able to puzzle it out. If you want simple stuff like buff timers on self/group, try nParse which is very user friendly. It's around on the forums as well as on github(?).

[kylok]

They’re 3rd party programs that read game data and use said data to display information in real time that was not intended to be easily displayed by games chosen UI.

If altering the UI on Green could be considered cheating, GINA is 100% cheating.

Like I said, you can rationalize it all you want. Most cheaters do.

They read data written to the log file. It's important to make this distinction since other programs literally do read the game data that is meant to be inaccessible. The log file is intentionally made accessible.

I don't think anyone is attempting to make the argument that altering greens forced UI is "cheating".

Extrapolating from this thread (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?p=722090&highlight=file#post722090) and Rogeans response to it, my assumption is that manipulation of the log file is allowed and therefore not "cheating" (I keep using quotes because I do not agree with your definition of cheating and did not find your argument compelling) "as long as they do not do any type of automatic control/response/manipulation/macro on your character in place of manual control."

[Donkey Hotay]

Why argue with these guys. They're deploying the discord tranny tactic of spamming topics they don't like with the implication that it's immoral or against the rules in the hopes that Stab will read their first two pages of noise and give up.

[kylok]

Why argue with these guys. They're deploying the discord tranny tactic of spamming topics they don't like with the implication that it's immoral or against the rules in the hopes that Stab will read their first two pages of noise and give up.

To prevent new people coming here for Green from thinking that players here are cheating when they are not.

[Tenlaar]

To prevent new people coming here for Green from thinking that players here are cheating when they are not.

Devs: you're not supposed to have this functionality.
GINA users: okay well I'm going to use another program to have it anyway.

It's using a third party program in order to restore functionality what was specifically removed from the client by the devs, and then some. You can argue all day long about how you don't think that's "technically cheating" but you're still going against the spirit of the entire project.

[Tecmos Deception]

You had log readers...that created graphical overlays to display real time game information on top of the game?

Of course not. I never said I did. You just apparently missed the usual meaning of a phrase like "this is pretty _____" and instead decided it means "this is exactly _____."


Devs: you're not supposed to have this functionality.
GINA users: okay well I'm going to use another program to have it anyway.

It's using a third party program in order to restore functionality what was specifically removed from the client by the devs, and then some. You can argue all day long about how you don't think that's "technically cheating" but you're still going against the spirit of the entire project.

You're on a roll with making up meanings for words, eh?

The staff never said they don't approve of real-time log parsing.

This wasn't cheating in classic any more than using voip, the prima strategy guide, or a cable modem. Just because a lot of people typed to talk, didn't have a strategy guide, and used dial up doesn't mean the other stuff were cheating. And today we have more refined and powerful versions of these things: discord, the wiki, high-speed internet. Just like we used to have log readers that few people used but that could function quite similar to GINA... and today we have GINA.

[bum3]

I like to let my buffs wear off all the way and have someone ask me multiple time before replenish. More mana efficient than an elderly robot hooker telling me before they even wear off.

Now that's classic... /beg for buffs from groupmates for 10minutes.

[Tenlaar]

Of course not. I never said I did. You just apparently missed the usual meaning of a phrase like "this is pretty _____" and instead decided it means "this is exactly _____."

If all that GINA did was read the log nobody would have a problem with it and you know that. Nobody is in here saying that DPS parsers should be banned. A plain old log reader and everything that GINA does are worlds apart.

[bum3]

Devs: you're not supposed to have this functionality.
GINA users: okay well I'm going to use another program to have it anyway.

Exactly.

[Niedar]

Devs: you're not supposed to have this functionality.
GINA users: okay well I'm going to use another program to have it anyway.

It's using a third party program in order to restore functionality what was specifically removed from the client by the devs, and then some. You can argue all day long about how you don't think that's "technically cheating" but you're still going against the spirit of the entire project.


If it was specifically removed from the game they would have removed logs but they didn't cause it classic. /thread

[DMN]

My guide:

1. Burn it with fire
2. Piss on the ashes

[bum3]

Life was better before DPS parsers. People just played to have fun. DPS parsers allowed min/maxing to ruin some of casuals fun. In WoW... when a deathknight could out tank, out heal, and out dps the group... 90% of groups where deathknights. Not fun. Same for EQ2... dirges top parsers... to the point of neglecting what they were intended to be.

[El-Hefe]

I don't think anyone is attempting to make the argument that altering greens forced UI is "cheating".


I would, I think the developers would, too.

That’s why they’re forcing a UI that gives you less information and accessibility.

Your argument comes down to arguing semantics and the “definition of cheating”. It’s like arguing the letter of the law while completely ignoring the spirit and intentions of which it was written.

Like I’ve said a million times, you can rationalize anything and argue semantics until your face turns blue.

But that shit is cheating, using third party programs that read game data and use it to give you an advantage over people who don’t use said program is cheating, full stop.

[kylok]

Devs: you're not supposed to have this functionality.
GINA users: okay well I'm going to use another program to have it anyway.

It's using a third party program in order to restore functionality what was specifically removed from the client by the devs, and then some. You can argue all day long about how you don't think that's "technically cheating" but you're still going against the spirit of the entire project.

I see it as:

Devs - we finally figured out how to make this UI more classic.

Clever players - we found a way to augment the information provided by the UI that doesn't inject code or violate the 3rd party app rule.

Pardon me if this is pedantic, but a log parser is not restoring function to the UI as it does not alter the UI. If it did, that would likely violate the server rules. Instead it creates separate windows that can be placed anywhere a user chooses, even "on top" of the game window if running in windowed mode.

As far as the spirit of the game goes, everyone plays their own way and I feel they should get to do that as long as it's within the server rules.

[Tecmos Deception]

Life was better before DPS parsers. People just played to have fun.

People still play to have fun. But not everyone has fun in the same way.

Some people don't have fun unless they get to force their idea of fun on everyone else.

Claiming that log parsers ruin the fun of casuals is... good lord. Lol.


On a related note, I don't even use gina.

[bum3]

Isn't a fairly easy fix is to require full screen mode?

[Tecmos Deception]

Isn't a fairly easy fix is to require full screen mode?

Not classic.


Also, audio triggers, second monitors, virtual machines, etc.

[bum3]

People still play to have fun. But not everyone has fun in the same way.

Some people don't have fun unless they get to force their idea of fun on everyone else.

Claiming that log parsers ruin the fun of casuals is... good lord. Lol.


On a related note, I don't even use gina.

Why is it good lord? When people start discriminating against classes for performing less or pushing people out because they are at 998 dps instead of a new 1000 dps minimum limit for raiding, does that not hinder fun?

I understand your fun comment. But that usually why play nice policies exist.

[kylok]

I would, I think the developers would, too.

That’s why they’re forcing a UI that gives you less information and accessibility.

Your argument comes down to arguing semantics and the “definition of cheating”. It’s like arguing the letter of the law while completely ignoring the spirit and intentions of which it was written.

Like I’ve said a million times, you can rationalize anything and argue semantics until your face turns blue.

But that shit is cheating, using third party programs that read game data and use it to give you an advantage over people who don’t use said program is cheating, full stop.

Quick clarifying question - do you think this player is cheating?

From Lament Icarus in the VeliousUI thread -

https://i.imgur.com/8YM1pCj.jpg

Here is a UI I made on Green to test this. It allows me to log off and back on with no issues whatsoever.

[bum3]

Not classic.


Also, audio triggers, second monitors, virtual machines, etc.

Yeah I was lucky to have a 19inch CRT. Won it in a Air Warrior tournament. Most people still had 13inch. Imagine having multiple CRTs on a desk? Be lucky if 2 fit.

[bum3]

Please post your super great gina files plz. Just in case I decide to afk play.

[El-Hefe]

I see it as:

Devs - we finally figured out how to make this UI more classic.

Clever players - we found a way to augment the information provided by the UI that doesn't inject code or violate the 3rd party app rule.

Pardon me if this is pedantic, but a log parser is not restoring function to the UI as it does not alter the UI. If it did, that would likely violate the server rules. Instead it creates separate windows that can be placed anywhere a user chooses, even "on top" of the game window if running in windowed mode.

As far as the spirit of the game goes, everyone plays their own way and I feel they should get to do that as long as it's within the server rules.

I don’t see why you even included that last part, everyone agrees with exactly that. What the disagreement is on is whether or not those rules should be changed to disallow the use of these cheater programs.

[bum3]

When the devs comments are it's not enforcable. It kinda makes it all a moot point. That also states they don't like it. #1 complaint about p99 blue high lvl is almost always "rule lawyers" for a reason.

[DMN]

Pardon me if this is pedantic, but a log parser is not restoring function to the UI as it does not alter the UI. If it did, that would likely violate the server rules. Instead it creates separate windows that can be placed anywhere a user chooses, even "on top" of the game window if running in windowed mode.




This entirely hinges upon how you want to define "UI".

[El-Hefe]

When the devs comments are it's not enforcable. It kinda makes it all a moot point. That also states they don't like it. #1 complaint about p99 blue high lvl is almost always "rule lawyers" for a reason.

Yeah, the devs can't do anything about it apparently, so the whole discussion is likely irrelevant.

But someone asked "Why does it bother people?"

Because it's cheating and no amount of weaselly pedantic rule lawyering changes that.

[Niedar]

This entirely hinges upon how you want to define "UI".

What other way can you define it than User Interface and is not a log file a user interface? Next we will tell me MUDs have no UI.

[bum3]

Yeah, the devs can't do anything about it apparently, so the whole discussion is likely irrelevant.

But someone asked "Why does it bother people?"

Because it's cheating and no amount of weaselly pedantic rule lawyering changes that.

+1

[kylok]

Happy to agree to disagree, just making sure both sides of the argument are out there so new players can make an informed decision about how they want to play the game.

[El-Hefe]

People are free to choose it they want to cheat or play as EQ Jesus intended.

[kylok]

Just as they are free to put their head in the sand, praise.

[Niedar]

Im happy cheating, thanks.

[Mblake81]

Cause it’s pretty much cheating. Lol

You guys can rationalize it all you want, but people don’t like it because you’re cheating and they don’t want to have to cheat as well to be on an even playing field.

Its not straight cheating per se, that would be using ShowEQ. A legit cheat program.

This is more laziness. To prop up a bad player who can't keep track. Its the same argument of manual transmission vs. Flappy Paddle transmission. Yes, using the flappy paddles is superior, the driver doesn't have to worry about errors as much but it will never be the same as a good manual driver.

They should admit the truth, they like using crutches and don't understand what the big deal is. That one poster said that (someone says that in each of these threads). Maybe they can't play EQ without them.


Edit: did any posters here actually have a overlay running on their gaming PC, how did they override EQ not being in a window to display it. How much resource did it take to run it and did it lag your computer while running EQ. If you actually did these things then you would remember. If it was on another computer, as lame as that is, how did you connect it to EQ to display such. Did you really go to such lengths just to get some loot tables, DPS parses and chat logs.

I mean.. its easy to load up a GINA that came later in EQs life to, and I quote, "Make EQ easy".

[kylok]

Its not straight cheating per se, that would be using ShowEQ. A legit cheat program.

This is more laziness. To prop up a bad player who can't keep track. Its the same argument of manual transmission vs. Flappy Paddle transmission. Yes, using the flappy paddles is superior, the driver doesn't have to worry about errors as much but it will never be the same as a good manual driver.

They should admit the truth, they like using crutches and don't understand what the big deal is. That one poster said that (someone says that in each of these threads). Maybe they can't play EQ without them.

Yes, great analogy

[Tenlaar]

"It doesn't restore functionality to the UI it just puts that functionality back onto your UI while you're playing" is incredibly pedantic and would only be argued by somebody who knows exactly what they're doing and knows that it flies in the face of the very purpose of this server.

[Niedar]

Flappy Paddles are classic.

[Gustoo]

The worst thing about using these things is missing the granular efficiency when it's gone.

Get used to spell sets. They go away. You regret not having 6 perfectly crafted preloaded spellsets
Get used to permanent compass. It goes away. You regret having to hit sense heading now.

[bwe]

"It doesn't restore functionality to the UI it just puts that functionality back onto your UI while you're playing" is incredibly pedantic and would only be argued by somebody who knows exactly what they're doing and knows that it flies in the face of the very purpose of this server.

Yup

[El-Hefe]

Im happy cheating, thanks.

See? Not that hard. Just own up and move on.

[Tecmos Deception]

Yeah I was lucky to have a 19inch CRT. Won it in a Air Warrior tournament. Most people still had 13inch. Imagine having multiple CRTs on a desk? Be lucky if 2 fit.

I was talking about current day, how going through effort to stop overlays wouldn't stop use of a program like Gina.


Why is it good lord? When people start discriminating against classes for performing less or pushing people out because they are at 998 dps instead of a new 1000 dps minimum limit for raiding, does that not hinder fun?

I understand your fun comment. But that usually why play nice policies exist.

I can't reply to this without getting political.

[kylok]

Its not straight cheating per se, that would be using ShowEQ. A legit cheat program.

This is more laziness. To prop up a bad player who can't keep track. Its the same argument of manual transmission vs. Flappy Paddle transmission. Yes, using the flappy paddles is superior, the driver doesn't have to worry about errors as much but it will never be the same as a good manual driver.

They should admit the truth, they like using crutches and don't understand what the big deal is. That one poster said that (someone says that in each of these threads). Maybe they can't play EQ without them.

Edit: I am not sure, I don't understand, the comprehension is beyond my intellectual reasoning... of why you like it.


That's a good analogy that accurately reflects my feelings on the subject. Just because I feel log parsers should be allowed does not mean that I don't think buff timer overlays and alerts are a crutch for a less than competent player.

[Daud]

Calling something that has been confirmed (currerntly) as GTG is just sounds so incredibly stupid and dishonest.

It isn't cheating. I know you want very, very badly for it to be considered cheating, but it isn't. I can see it's a very personal issue for some of you, so much that you're willing to just say anything and everything you can regardless if it's true or not to get what you want.

Here's some info for you. You know all those evil "third party programs" like MQ/SEQ/etc that are banned here and considered cheating? There are servers out there that allow you to use those programs by name. Using those programs on those servers that allow it are not cheating. GINA on P99 is no different, even if the devs don't personally like it, at least they have the dignity to not be a bag of dicks about it like some of you.

The same applies here. On high has confirmed GINA is not currently against the rules. Calling people cheaters for using a legal program is nothing but trolling and shit stirring by people who are incapable of approaching a subject they do not like with honesty or integrity. Even if part of me could actually get on board with finding some non-intrusive way to get rid of GINA, I'd still find you dishonest idiots fucking abhorrent.

[Tenlaar]

Here's some info for you. You know all those evil "third party programs" like MQ/SEQ/etc that are banned here and considered cheating? There are servers out there that allow you to use those programs by name. Using those programs on those servers that allow it are not cheating.

Using cheat codes built into a single player game is still cheating because it's not the way that the base game experience is intended to be.

[Mblake81]

I was talking about current day, how going through effort to stop overlays wouldn't stop use of a program like Gina.




I can't reply to this without getting political.

Its not a real request to stop it, Tecmos. No use trying to figure out how to. This is a thought exercise in how introducing things like this can split a community that wouldn't be without it.

Some trolls here on the forums got me to thinking about how many advantages players have now compared to back then. Some of the trolls want to troll harder and suggest needing the CRT monitors (the really good ones are still nice (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8BVTHxc4LM)) and using 56K dialup. Some things are not practical.

People have argued that because RogerWilco released in 1999 that voice chat should be allowed. Some have argued that even though it was out that it really wasn't all that usable. This is a thought exercise. People like crutches.

People have argued because some parsers that could check DPS (I never heard of one check loot logs etc.. i wonder if original developers ever commented on that) that later programs like GINA that display an overlay in real time are ok. Here we are saying its lame. Thought exercise.

Does it bother me in my game? Nope.
But I am aware other people are out there playing the same game with additional *useless* information. We are not playing the same game. Maybe you are getting a heads up about something whereas I am keeping a mental track of it subject to human failure.

[Danth]

Most of the same arguments supporting "gina" could be applied to things like packet sniffers that don't directly interact with the client. But that's nothing new....terrible players have always tended to make any mental gymnastics needed to justify their use of training wheels. They're terrified of the notion of having a level playing field because they know, deep down, they can't hack it.

Danth

[Niedar]

Most of the same arguments supporting "gina" could be applied to things like packet sniffers that don't directly interact with the client. But that's nothing new....terrible players have always tended to make any mental gymnastics needed to justify their use of training wheels. They're terrified of the notion of having a level playing field because they know, deep down, they can't hack it.

Danth


Cant hack it on that oh so competitive PvE server. Yeah, that is it.

[Mblake81]

Cant hack it on that oh so competitive PvE server. Yeah, that is it.

https://i.imgur.com/2HHk1ca.jpg

[Daud]

Using cheat codes built into a single player game is still cheating because it's not the way that the base game experience is intended to be.

Ok, well, when the devs say that GINA is GTG, then the most basic fucking intent I can divine out of that statement is that GINA is GTG.

[Tenlaar]

Ok, well, when the devs say that GINA is GTG, then the most basic fucking intent I can divine out of that statement is that GINA is GTG.

Like you said, there are servers that allow MQ to be used. That doesn't make MQ suddenly not a cheat program any more. Whether the devs allow people to use GINA or not does not determine whether it should be seen as cheating.

[kylok]

Serious question: do you feel that using deadly boss mods in WoW is cheating?

[Danth]

Cant hack it on that oh so competitive PvE server. Yeah, that is it.

Sure is! Must be really embarrassing to be that bad at the game, too. That's why the folks using such aids always get so defensive about it.

Danth

[Daud]

Like you said, there are servers that allow MQ to be used. That doesn't make MQ suddenly not a cheat program any more. Whether the devs allow people to use GINA or not does not determine whether it should be seen as cheating.

That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard today.

The people making rules are absolutely what determines if something is cheating or not. They make up the fucking rules. They could waltz over, right now and edit it and say "GINA is banned and if we catch you using it you're banned". But they didn't, and currently, they say GINA is fine.

[Vexenu]

Imagine there was a racing league that for some reason decided to ban rear-view mirrors. So none of the cars have rear-view mirrors anymore. Then some enterprising fellow rigs up a mirror on a small flying drone and syncs it up to float perfectly in the car where the rear-view mirror would normally be, giving the driver the full function of a rear-view mirror.

Would that be cheating?

Because that is basically GINA in a nutshell. It's adding capabilities that were deliberately removed from the client for being unclassic. But people say this is ok because they aren't actually PART of the game or the UI. They just float on top of it. Sort of like a rear-view mirror that isn't attached to the car, but just floats inside of it where the mirror would normally be.

I think it's rather obviously that this grossly violates the spirit of the law, even if is technically within the letter of the law ("does not modify the client"). This is why I think the correct argument against GINA does not hinge on whether or not it technically violates the prohibition against client modification, but simply that it is UNCLASSIC AS HELL and does not belong on the Green server. Because nobody back in the day was using real-time log readers to place floating GUI elements overlaid onto their EQ screen. NOBODY. It did not exist. It's unclassic as all get-out and the people advocating it know that. Keep it on Blue. It doesn't belong on Green.

[Tenlaar]

That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard today.

The people making rules are absolutely what determines if something is cheating or not. They make up the fucking rules. They could waltz over, right now and edit it and say "GINA is banned and if we catch you using it you're banned". But they didn't, and currently, they say GINA is fine.

Again, would you say that somebody who is using cheat codes built into a single player game was playing that game without cheating? Would you say that using unlimited ammo or unlimited health codes aren't cheating? Of course you wouldn't, yet they were built into the game by the developers. To give people the option. The option to cheat.

[DMN]

What other way can you define it than User Interface and is not a log file a user interface? Next we will tell me MUDs have no UI.

Any information being conveyed to the client that is distinguishable by human perception.

[Daud]

Again, would you say that somebody who is using cheat codes built into a single player game was playing that game without cheating? Would you say that using unlimited ammo or unlimited health codes aren't cheating? Of course you wouldn't, yet they were built into the game by the developers. To give people the option. The option to cheat.

Did I violate the explicit ruleset I agreed to abide by?

If yes; cheating.
If not; not cheating.

[Tenlaar]

Did I violate the explicit ruleset I agreed to abide by?

If yes; cheating.
If not; not cheating.

We can start at basic levels if you need to, but you're not starting at the right place.

If somebody is using infinite health and ammo cheat codes built into a single player game, are they cheating? Yes/No.

[Niedar]

We can start at basic levels if you need to, but you're not starting at the right place.

If somebody is using infinite health and ammo cheat codes built into a single player game, are they cheating? Yes/No.

No.

[Daud]

Imagine there was a racing league that for some reason decided to ban rear-view mirrors. So none of the cars have rear-view mirrors anymore. Then some enterprising fellow rigs up a mirror on a small flying drone and syncs it up to float perfectly in the car where the rear-view mirror would normally be, giving the driver the full function of a rear-view mirror.

Would that be cheating?

Because that is basically GINA in a nutshell. It's adding capabilities that were deliberately removed from the client for being unclassic. But people say this is ok because they aren't actually PART of the game or the UI. They just float on top of it. Sort of like a rear-view mirror that isn't attached to the car, but just floats inside of it where the mirror would normally be.

I think it's rather obviously that this grossly violates the spirit of the law, even if is technically within the letter of the law ("does not modify the client"). This is why I think the correct argument against GINA does not hinge on whether or not it technically violates the prohibition against client modification, but simply that it is UNCLASSIC AS HELL and does not belong on the Green server. Because nobody back in the day was using real-time log readers to place floating GUI elements overlaid onto their EQ screen. NOBODY. It did not exist. It's unclassic as all get-out and the people advocating it know that. Keep it on Blue. It doesn't belong on Green.

I don't care about people wanting to get rid of it, but argument is painfully disingenuous. This isn't in any way unclear, GINA was never a secret, this is far, FAR from the first time people have stated this opinion on these boards. It's simply something you don't like that you want to get changed. Get out of here with the "spirit of the rule" garbage, it doesn't mean anything when the devs have known about it for years and outright stated GTG. At any time they could have walked right over and said "GINA is banned, have a nice day".

[Daud]

We can start at basic levels if you need to, but you're not starting at the right place.

If somebody is using infinite health and ammo cheat codes built into a single player game, are they cheating? Yes/No.

Can't answer without more information.

Are they against the rules I agreed to play by?

[Vexenu]

Why should grossly unclassic workaround programs that restore functionality that was intentionally removed from the client be allowed on Green?

How exactly is GINA part of the classic experience?

Is Daud even capable of playing EverQuest without this pathetic crutch?

Questions that demand answers!

[Tenlaar]

Can't answer without more information.

Are they against the rules I agreed to play by?

What do you mean by "rules they agreed to play by?" I have a feeling that you're avoiding answering a very basic question because you don't want to follow it to it's logical conclusion. Let's say it's a PS4 shooter with a cheat code built in where if you put your name in as BULLETSTORM you have infinite ammo. Is that person playing the game "legit" or are they, by using a cheat code in order to activate an advantage that is not part of the base game, cheating?

[kylok]

I believe his argument is that if he is not violating the agreed upon rules then it is not cheating.

[Tenlaar]

I believe his argument is that if he is not violating the agreed upon rules then it is not cheating.

His argument is that starting up the SEGA Shadowrun game and hitting ABBACAB before the SEGA logo comes up so that you have access to the hidden menu where you can give yourself karma and money and the best cyberdeck isn't cheating because the developers made the game so that you can do it, and it's an absurd argument.

Having permission to cheat doesn't make it not cheating.

[kylok]

It does beg the question - why did they put in the work to have that menu at all if it was never intended to be used?

[Tenlaar]

It does beg the question - why did the put in the work to have that menu at all if it was never intended to be used?

Having permission to cheat doesn't make it not cheating. Infinite health and ammo cheat codes are cheating but they were built in by the game developers for people to use if they want to.

HAVING PERMISSION TO CHEAT DOES NOT MAKE IT NOT CHEATING.

[kylok]

/shrug agree to disagree

[Daud]

What do you mean by "rules they agreed to play by?" I have a feeling that you're avoiding answering a very basic question because you don't want to follow it to it's logical conclusion. Let's say it's a PS4 shooter with a cheat code built in where if you put your name is as BULLETSTORM you have infinite ammo. Is that person playing the game legit or are they, by using a cheat code in order to activate an advantage that is not part of the base game, cheating?

I'm not avoiding answering, you're simply not providing enough information for the question to be answered. For me to answer if something is cheating, I have to know if it's against the rules. It's implicit to the meaning of cheating itself. In GINA's case, when it's been explicitly determined by the rule makers to not be against the rules, I can't even accept a "spirit of the rule" like several others are trying to incorrectly use as an argument. It's simply not cheating and it's absurd to even think that.

Your completely unrelated examples of things like unlimited lives/ammo, whatever, simply do not apply to the situation with GINA and P99. I can't begin to guess where you personally believe where "legit" begins and ends without any context to what is and isn't against the rules because that is basically the linchpin of determining if something is cheating or not.

If you seriously believe that you can be cheating using something that has been expressly permitted in the ruleset, you and I are never going to understand each other. I cannot see how anyone can believe that on the face of it, it just sounds completely absurd.

HAVING PERMISSION TO CHEAT DOES NOT MAKE IT NOT CHEATING.

It absolutely, 101% does. Using SEQ/MQ on a server that allows SEQ/MQ isn't cheating. Using GINA on a server that allows GINA isn't cheating.

[Daud]

Why should grossly unclassic workaround programs that restore functionality that was intentionally removed from the client be allowed on Green?


Because the devs said so and that's all there is to it.

How exactly is GINA part of the classic experience?


It isn't

Is Daud even capable of playing EverQuest without this pathetic crutch?

Absolutely, it really doesn't offer me much since I mostly play a rogue that doesn't have buffs or messes or anything. I use it almost entirely as a room timer or trader alert, but, I got along just fine using my phone for that before I used GINA. I wouldn't really miss it for a second. As I said before, I might even be interested in a non invasive way to get rid of it.

I was just pointing out how stupid your argument is.

[solidious77]

Sooo..... Any good guides for GINA? lol

I haven't logged in for a long time but I recall having a hard time setting up distinct timers for mobs that had the same name - It was easy to make a new timer appear with the same name, but I was trying to distinguish them in the title of the timer display like:

A fire beetle 1 = 1:00
A fire beetle 2 = 1:00 etc

Anyone know if thats possible?

[Bazia]

GINA makes soloing as an ENC much, much easier than it should be

[aaezil]

Imagine something not breaking any rules but still being wrong to do

[pink grapefruit]

Does it matter one way or another, on a blue server? Use it if you want, or don't use it. Other players using it when you're not doesn't affect your gameplay at all if you're not playing on a pvp server.

So who cares? :O

[Bazia]

Does it matter one way or another, on a blue server? Use Macroquest if you want, or don't use it. Other players using it when you're not doesn't affect your gameplay at all if you're not playing on a pvp server.

So who cares? :O

[pink grapefruit]

:O

[Tenlaar]

If you seriously believe that you can be cheating using something that has been expressly permitted in the ruleset, you and I are never going to understand each other. I cannot see how anyone can believe that on the face of it, it just sounds completely absurd.

If you literally cannot even bring yourself to acknowledge that using infinite ammo cheat codes is cheating then it is a complete waste of time trying to discuss anything with you.

[kylok]

Does it matter one way or another, on a blue server? Use Macroquest if you want, or don't use it. Other players using it when you're not doesn't affect your gameplay at all if you're not playing on a pvp server.

So who cares? :O

woah wait a sec, I was on your side until I read this. Without getting into details, TPPs and/or RMT is probably the worst thing someone can do in regards to other players' experience. That's why its taken very seriously, and that's why players leave me wonderful posts like the quote below

[Tethler]

Claiming that log parsers ruin the fun of casuals is... good lord. Lol.



I haven't seen it at all on p99, but I very clearly remember in WoW when parsers became super common in early BC, people would often get flamed in dungeon groups and/or kicked if their DPS wasn't up to par.

[Sillyturtle]

Neat fact.

Still cheating.

It's not cheating. You just don't like it.

I don't even use it, but I'm starting to want to. :)

[El-Hefe]

It’s cheating, the developers just can’t stop it so they don’t. If they could, they would. They’ve said as much.

By all means, cheat away, cheater. :p

[Sillyturtle]

It’s cheating, the developers just can’t stop it so they don’t. If they could, they would. They’ve said as much.

By all means, cheat away, cheater. :p

The developers have said it's not cheating.

You are wrong, end of story.

[FungusTrooper]

you can rationalize it all your want

but GINA is 0% cheating

[sixteenmiles]

Guess what.

We parsed our logs in classic too.

[Chortles Snort|eS]

Guess what.

We cheated in classic too.

[Chryorn]

But that means that cheating is classic. Therefore cheating has to be mandatory on Green for the real classic experience.

[Vexenu]

Guess what.

We parsed our logs in classic too.

"We parsed logs in classic."

vs.

"We read our logs in real-time and overlay that data into UI elements independent of the client to functionally replicate UI features the devs intentionally removed."

If you are too dumb to see the enormous distinction then it's no wonder you need to use cheat programs to play EverQuest.

[Bazia]

a UI that shows you your mezz and charm timers on mobs is ez mode dudes

[Baler]

people did have audio and visual queues via text parsers in 1999

=|

[Vexenu]

people did have audio and visual queues via text parsers in 1999

=|

Total bullshit. Prove it with screenshots and old forum posts if you can.

[Mblake81]

Total bullshit. Prove it with screenshots and old forum posts if you can.

They would have posted links or screenshots when the first arguments popped up.

[dekova]

If you are too dumb to see the enormous distinction then it's no wonder you need to use cheat programs to play EverQuest.

Come on man, we're all adults here. Don't be insulting ass. It's not going to magically make people agree with you.

[dekova]

Total bullshit. Prove it with screenshots and old forum posts if you can.

I was one of those guys who had a really crappy log reader setup. Two computers, a shared directory, and my really shity attempt at programming something in Java Swing.

And I just remembered... I got some help from the guys at work and one of them started playing EverQuest as a result.

[kylok]

I was one of those guys who had a really crappy log reader setup. Two computers, a shared directory, and my really shity attempt at programming something in Java Swing.

And I just remembered... I got some help from the guys at work and one of them started playing EverQuest as a result.

This sounds extremely classic

[dekova]

This sounds extremely classic

And a huge pain in the ass. Java Swing wasn't exactly awesome sauce, and they were three or four incompatible versions of java running around with different compilers having the ability to use different assets. It worked though.

[Vexenu]

Can anyone produce a classic screenshot of a log reader feeding real-time data into an overlay UI? Or a forum post from 1999-2000 referencing such? Post it if you got it, otherwise stop claiming such things are classic. Log parsing (which is definitely classic) is simply not in the same universe as real-time log reading software that renders data into a UI.

And for the record, I don't think that guy is dumb. I think he - along with many others - is being intentionally disingenuous about GINA because he doesn't want to give up the advantage it provides him.

[dekova]

I don't think anyone is going to be able to provide a screenshot, I certainly can't. But you're making it sound like reading a log file and creating a timer is something that we just now have the technology to do. That's simply not true. The only hard part was that EverQuest took over your computer. That's why I needed to use two.

Maybe I could have figured out an overlay if I spent enough time with it, but as an IT guy I had extra computers and it was just easier to do it that way.

[kylok]

Just to clarify out of curiosity - was your parser giving you data in real time?

[Baler]

To the nay sayers. You're also obligated to find proof that, in your words, it wasn't classic.

If you demand proof from us you must also present proof.

Just because you say it wasn't doesn't mean it's true. Two way street.

-----
It's who ever yells the loudest that gets the most attention.
People will turn a blind eye to the truth in favor of feelings and emotion.

[dekova]

Just to clarify out of curiosity - was your parser giving you data in real time?

Yes, it started as a way for me to manage my mezzes and it did that accurately. There were occasional lockups, but I blame that on the shity state of java and swing at the time and not on any kind of log issue.

Edit: thinking back on it, it's probably not fair to blame the occasional issue on java, more my shity skills at the time.

[kylok]

Seems like this all checks out - only difference I can see beyond programming sophistication is running EQ in a window and dragging the parser on top of it. GINA-like programs confirmed classic until evidence is presented to prove otherwise.

[Mblake81]

To the nay sayers. You're also obligated to find proof that, in your words, it wasn't classic.

Hard to do, I can't find a screenshot with one running or a picture of a guy running two computers with information being fed to the second to display results. Wasn't able to locate any forum posts.

If you have some positive proof it would be nice to see it to put this to rest.

Seems like this all checks out - only difference I can see beyond programming sophistication is running EQ in a window and dragging the parser on top of it. GINA-like programs confirmed classic until evidence is presented to prove otherwise.

Hearsay doesn't confirm classic.

[Vexenu]

To the nay sayers. You're also obligated to find proof that, in your words, it wasn't classic.

If you demand proof from us you must also present proof.

Just because you say it wasn't doesn't mean it's true. Two way street.

-----
It's who ever yells the loudest that gets the most attention.
People will turn a blind eye to the truth in favor of feelings and emotion.

People in this thread are making a positive claim, namely that real-time log readers with UI elements were classic. A positive claim needs evidence to support it. Otherwise the negative claim (that such a thing did not exist) is the reasonable conclusion.

There are thousands upon thousands of old screenshots and forum posts that have provided all sorts of data for this project's recreation of the classic EQ experience. Finding evidence of UI elements and real-time log readers should be fairly easy if such things existed, because in the former case they would be clearly visible in screenshots, and in the latter they would inevitably be mentioned in forum discussions.

[kylok]

People in this thread are making a positive claim, namely that real-time log readers with UI elements were classic. A positive claim needs evidence to support it. Otherwise the negative claim (that such a thing did not exist) is the reasonable conclusion.

There are thousands upon thousands of old screenshots and forum posts that have provided all sorts of data for this project's recreation of the classic EQ experience. Finding evidence of UI elements and real-time log readers should be fairly easy if such things existed, because in the former case they would be clearly visible in screenshots, and in the latter they would inevitably be mentioned in forum discussions.

Given that EQ was forced full screen back then and real time parsing programs were ran on a second computer (and so few people did this) it's doubtful any screen shots would be found. At the very least we've entered a stale mate on anecdotal evidence. It's entirely plausible that this sort of thing did happen back then, and we have at least one person chiming in that they did in fact do this. It's not conclusive but it's a pretty strong argument given the circumstances.

[dekova]

People in this thread are making a positive claim, namely that real-time log readers with UI elements were classic. A positive claim needs evidence to support it. Otherwise the negative claim (that such a thing did not exist) is the reasonable conclusion.

There are thousands upon thousands of old screenshots and forum posts that have provided all sorts of data for this project's recreation of the classic EQ experience. Finding evidence of UI elements and real-time log readers should be fairly easy if such things existed, because in the former case they would be clearly visible in screenshots, and in the latter they would inevitably be mentioned in forum discussions.

The thing I've learned about arguing with people is that anything short of a big flashing you're wrong FedEx delivered package isn't going to change their mind. I don't think I'm going to change yours.

I gave you guys the information I had from my own personal experience back when I was working on a Y2K project, so that was 1999. Take it or leave it.

[Mblake81]

Given that EQ was forced full screen back then and real time parsing programs were ran on a second computer (and so few people did this) it's doubtful any screen shots would be found. At the very least we've entered a stale mate on anecdotal evidence. It's entirely plausible that this sort of thing did happen back then, and we have at least one person chiming in that they did in fact do this. It's not conclusive but it's a pretty strong argument given the circumstances.

no, it isn't.

one guy? surely there would have been others needing an advantage so it would have been shared on some message board or something. Some reference to it. These kinds of things get out to the other players just like GINA does now.

The fact that there has been no links, no pictures, no forum posts, no nothing but a few guys making unverifiable claims. Giving the situation, such a claim could be easily fabricated to support their want of a program giving data.

ALSO: no one claimed using it on a second computer until I asked. This gave a way out into a shady area and you all slipped into it. Good job. :D

[Niedar]

Parsing existed in 1999, showing UI elements existed in 1999. Sorry to say, GINA is classic, what is your proof its not?

[Mblake81]

Parsing existed in 1999, showing UI elements existed in 1999. Sorry to say, GINA is classic, what is your proof its not?

Burden of proof is not on my shoulders. If you can make a forum posts several times to troll it is then you can easily take a moment to prove it.

Sorry you suck, Charlie Sheen.

[Niedar]

Burden of proof is not on my shoulders. If you can make a forum posts several times to troll it is then you can easily take a moment to prove it.

Sorry you suck, Charlie Sheen.

Of course the burden of proof is on your shoulders, GINA is classic by default. Prove its not.

[Mblake81]

Of course the burden of proof is on your shoulders, GINA is classic by default. Prove its not.

Prove it is, troll.

[kylok]

Given that the current rule is that GINA is allowed it does seem that the burden of proof is upon the players wishing to change that.

[Mblake81]

Given that the current rule is that GINA is allowed it does seem that the burden of proof is upon the players wishing to change that.

I don't wish to change it. I haven't stated the devs should take it or requested that they do.

I just asked if it did, people became defensive. Blood is in the water.

[kylok]

I don't use this program, or any log parsing program, I don't care if they're allowed or not. Given what other folks on both sides have presented in terms of evidence it's looking like a stalemate. Seems like the current rule should stand? If this were a bug report nothing would be changed....

[dekova]

Guys, let's keep it civil.

I'd like to ask you guys to look at this a slightly different way...

I think we can all agree that reading and displaying log information provides an advantage, yes? So then, given that the technology existed in 1999, and was simple enough for some Junior programmer with 6 months of experience to implement, how many months or years do you think it would have taken for someone to do so?

[kylok]

Imo it would take no more than a week for a competent programmer to implement something like this, in a rudimentary form.

[Mblake81]

Guys, let's keep it civil.

I'd like to ask you guys to look at this a slightly different way...

I think we can all agree that reading and displaying log information provides an advantage, yes? So then, given that the technology existed in 1999, and was simple enough for some Junior programmer with 6 months of experience to implement, how many months or years do you think it would have taken for someone to do so?

Dunno, I would check to see when GINA first released. hmm. (didn't see a specific release date on first look through)

but,

GINA is developed using Microsoft's .Net Framework 4.0, so you will be prompted to install that during the GINA setup if it is not already installed.

Microsoft framework 4.0 release date February 13, 2002

.NET Framework 4.0 is supported on Windows XP (with Service Pack 3), Windows Server 2003, Vista, Server 2008, 7 and Server 2008 R2. Applications utilizing .NET Framework 4.0 will also run on computers with .NET Framework 4.5 or 4.6 installed, which supports additional operating systems. .NET Framework 4.0 is the last version to support Windows XP and Windows Server 2003.

[kylok]

GINA is a new program. Programs with similar functionality were allegedly (for now) written with a different framework, as implied by dekova

[dekova]

Dunno, I would check to see when GINA first released. hmm. (didn't see a specific release date on first look through)

but,

Saying log readers couldn't exist before .net is like saying cars couldn't exist before the fuel injected engine was invented.

[Vexenu]

The problem is that it is impossible to prove a negative of this sort. I could show you ten thousand screenshots and forum posts from the classic era that provide no evidence of GINA-like programs, and yet that would not be enough to provide that it did not exist.

In fact, there is NO WAY to prove it did not exist, because you can always get someone to come out of the woodwork (as we see here) and claim that it did, while providing zero evidence (note that I am not accusing dekova of lying, just pointing out that he cannot provide any evidence for his claim, which makes it essentially inadmissible, otherwise everyone's baseless claims must be given equal weight).

It's a fact that EQ was a game that was neckbearded by the hardcore from the beginning. People literally ruined their lives over the game. It was called Evercrack for a reason. People took the game very seriously and anything that gave players an advantage would have been widely used and discussed. I therefore posit that there would have been a strong demand for a GINA-like program at the time, if such a program existed, and that if did exist then evidence of it would be preserved in the same internet archives that have enabled the research that has allowed P1999 to reach its current state of classic accuracy. Further, if the production of GINA-like software is as relatively easy as dekova claims, it is very likely that multiple versions would have been produced by independent programmers, which only increases the likelihood that such programs would have been widely discussed and shared. Which means we should have ample evidence for them.

But we find no evidence for anything like GINA in the internet archives. Therefore we must reasonably conclude no such GINA-like program existed back in the day.

[Mblake81]

GINA is a new program. Programs with similar functionality were allegedly (for now) written with a different framework, as implied by dekova

What were the names of these programs?

Where they ever on websites for others to download. Was this EQ secret shared?

Were these self written and used only for personal use, if so and this was known in era, was it ever addressed by the original devs?

This is what I am curious about.

Saying log readers couldn't exist before .net is like saying cars couldn't exist before the fuel injected engine was invented.

Fair enough, we are talking about GINA though.

Which programs were used beforehand, any links to those?

[Niedar]

The problem is that it is impossible to prove a negative of this sort. I could show you ten thousand screenshots and forum posts from the classic era that provide no evidence of GINA-like programs, and yet that would not be enough to provide that it did not exist.

In fact, there is NO WAY to prove it did not exist, because you can always get someone to come out of the woodwork (as we see here) and claim that it did, while providing zero evidence (note that I am not accusing dekova of lying, just pointing out that he cannot provide any evidence for his claim, which makes it essentially inadmissible, otherwise everyone's baseless claims must be given equal weight).

It's a fact that EQ was a game that was neckbearded by the hardcore from the beginning. People literally ruined their lives over the game. It was called Evercrack for a reason. People took the game very seriously and anything that gave players an advantage would have been widely used and discussed. I therefore posit that there would have been a strong demand for a GINA-like program at the time, if such a program existed, and that if did exist then evidence of it would be preserved in the same internet archives that have enabled the research that has allowed P1999 to reach its current state of classic accuracy. Further, if the production of GINA-like software is as relatively easy as dekova claims, it is very likely that multiple versions would have been produced by independent programmers, which only increases the likelihood that such programs would have been widely discussed and shared. Which means we should have ample evidence for them.

But we find no evidence for anything like GINA in the internet archives. Therefore we must reasonably conclude no such GINA-like program existed back in the day.


Sure you could prove it did not exist or if it did that it was not allowed in classic. One method is to prove the mechanics by which it works did not exist in 1999. If you could prove logs did not exists from the game client in 1999 it would be proof that GINA like programs did not exists because parsing logs is how they operate.

You could also find evidence that the developers actively took measure to prevent a program such as GINA from working and or being used by banning players for using it.

A third way would be to prove that graphical user interfaces did not exists in 1999 but good luck proving that one.

[kylok]

If you're attempting to compel me to research this you won't - I don't care. Here's a similar example however, regarding something I do/did care about. I came upon the mechanic described here Bind Wound in Combat (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222964) before this thread was made. I reported it as an exploit, was told by management to find evidence that the mechanic behaved differently than it currently does on the server. I could not find such evidence. Does it seem like it's counter to the intended use? Yes. Does it provide an advantage to a player who knows this over one who doesn't? Absolutely! Could I prove it? No. So it's still in game.

[dekova]

If you're attempting to compel me to research this you won't - I don't care. Here's a similar example however, regarding something I do/did care about. I came upon the mechanic described here Bind Wound in Combat (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=222964) before this thread was made. I reported it as an exploit, was told by management to find evidence that the mechanic behaved differently than it currently does on the server. I could not find such evidence. Does it seem like it's counter to the intended use? Yes. Does it provide an advantage to a player who knows this over one who doesn't? Absolutely! Could I prove it? No. So it's still in game.

Actually, I think bind wounds in combat has been disabled on green.

[Izmael]

Can we just ban GINA and move on?

[dekova]

What were the names of these programs?

Where they ever on websites for others to download. Was this EQ secret shared?

Were these self written and used only for personal use, if so and this was known in era, was it ever addressed by the original devs?

This is what I am curious about.



Fair enough, we are talking about GINA though.

Which programs were used beforehand, any links to those?

Yeah, the stuff I coded was way too janky to share and/or sell, even if I ever wanted to. I think the text strings it looked for were mostly hardcoded; I don't know that I even had an understanding of regex then.

The thing is, there is really nothing hard about programming a log reader. Displaying data may be a bit harder, but even in 1999 you could have done it all - soup to nuts - in something as simple as microsoft excel or access. Saying that I was some kind of prodigy because - out of the million or so EQ players - I was the only one with the insight or talent to do this is flattering but very likely inaccurate.

[kylok]

Actually, I think bind wounds in combat has been disabled on green.

Just tested on beta, still works exactly as it did when I reported it.

[Mblake81]

Saying that I was some kind of prodigy because - out of the million or so EQ players - I was the only one with the insight or talent to do this is flattering but very likely inaccurate.

I didn't make that statement. I did respond to the other poster pointing out that only one guy had made a statement that he created such a program to use. Others have said programs or the ability was there but none except for you has stepped forward to claim they in fact did make them and use them.

Yes, it started as a way for me to manage my mezzes and it did that accurately. There were occasional lockups, but I blame that on the shity state of java and swing at the time and not on any kind of log issue.

Edit: thinking back on it, it's probably not fair to blame the occasional issue on java, more my shity skills at the time.

I was one of those guys who had a really crappy log reader setup. Two computers, a shared directory, and my really shity attempt at programming something in Java Swing.

And I just remembered... I got some help from the guys at work and one of them started playing EverQuest as a result.

Which server did you play on and what kind of computer was the second one that you used to display the information?

How did you use this and how did it help you to manage your mezzes? I ask because playing the game was keeping a mental track of them. The game itself didn't provide the information for the player, if that was the intention then it would have been displayed by the developers. The game didn't have this information displayed so it was up to the player to remember.

[Vexenu]

Bind Wound in combat is actually a good example. Trying to "prove" that combat Bind Wound did not exist back in the day is basically impossible, just like it's impossible to prove that GINA did not exist. Because in both cases the best evidence that neither existed is the sheer absence of evidence that either did.

For example, my first EQ character was a Human Monk created shortly after Kunark released. I used to spend a ton of time browsing the old Monkly Business forums to learn about the class. There was an enormous amount of time and effort the Monk community put into testing and aggregating data about the best ways to play a Monk, from pulling to DPSing to soloing. Bind Wound was always emphasized as a core skill, especially for soloing Monks. And soloing itself was heavily discussed, with various techniques (i.e. whether or not to use Instill Doubt/Intimidation while soloing), specific zone and efficiently soloable mobs always hot topics.

And yet this combat bind wound macro, which is literally the single most powerful solo tactic for a melee class, was NEVER mentioned. Not once. You will find no mention of it in any classic-era forum posts. And yet according to the rules of evidence, this is not sufficient proof to declare that it did not exist. We're in a similar spot with GINA. I think everyone recognizes that nothing like the current incarnation of GINA existed in classic, and yet we cannot prove that categorically, because it's very difficult if not impossible to prove a negative of this type.

[Mblake81]

Bind Wound in combat is actually a good example. Trying to "prove" that combat Bind Wound did not exist back in the day is basically impossible, just like it's impossible to prove that GINA did not exist.


Well, no. If GINA was created for windows framework 4.0 it did in fact not exist in the era we are playing. So unless there is a reference I missed on his forums site then i would say GINA itself did not exist.

A program like GINA *could* have existed but no one except for one player here has mentioned it. That is because he wrote an "accurate but questionable" program that he used for personal use because "it wasn't good enough to share or sell". We wouldn't find this program on a website or a forum because it wasn't shared, so far only one guy would have used it and claims such.

Yeah, the stuff I coded was way too janky to share and/or sell, even if I ever wanted to. I think the text strings it looked for were mostly hardcoded; I don't know that I even had an understanding of regex then.

The thing is, there is really nothing hard about programming a log reader. Displaying data may be a bit harder, but even in 1999 you could have done it all - soup to nuts - in something as simple as microsoft excel or access. Saying that I was some kind of prodigy because - out of the million or so EQ players - I was the only one with the insight or talent to do this is flattering but very likely inaccurate.


GINA looks to have been put in after the Velious era, this is not totally certain as I have not scoured the GINA forum for an exact date.

[Vexenu]

Correct, I should have said "a GINA-like program" rather than GINA itself. I'm just saying that it's unfair to shift the burden of proof to those of us who claim that nothing like this existed back then. Because proving that is basically impossible. But proving it DID exist should be much easier if it did, because the evidence for such a useful program should be extensive and well-documented. Just like it would be for something as useful as combat bind wound. But we don't find either documented historically during the classic era.

[dekova]

Well, no. If GINA was created for windows framework 4.0 it did in fact not exist in the era we are playing. So unless there is a reference I missed on his forums site then i would say GINA itself did not exist.

A program like GINA *could* have existed but no one except for one player here that I just made a response to has mentioned it. That is because he wrote an "accurate but questionable" program that he used for personal use because "it wasn't good enough to share or sell". We wouldn't find this program on a website or a forum because it wasn't shared, so far only one guy would have used it and claims such.

GINA looks to have been put in after the Velious era, this is not totally certain as I have not scoured the GINA forum for an exact date.

I don't know if this adds much to the conversation, but I was making a pretty comfortable living at the time as a consultant in NYC (don't be too impressed, with Y2K, anyone with any skill was getting work). If I had found something commercially available, I certainly would have bought it instead of rolling my own.

But really guys, writing something to display timers based on a stuff in a text file takes near to no skill at all. Even back in 1999, it could literally be a "learn to code" project that you would tackle after hello world. Saying that nobody but me thought of it or had the capability is a really, really big stretch.

[Mblake81]

Correct, I should have said "a GINA-like program" rather than GINA itself. I'm just saying that it's unfair to shift the burden of proof to those of us who claim that nothing like this existed back then. Because proving that is basically impossible. But proving it DID exist should be much easier if it did, because the evidence for such a useful program should be extensive and well-documented. Just like it would be for something as useful as combat bind wound. But we don't find either documented historically during the classic era.

Yes, I agree. There should be more than one guy stepping forward making the claim that not only did he use one but he also wrote one and used it on a second computer (after someone asked how they displayed it since EQ could not be windowed..)

There are plenty of in era players on this forum, he shouldn't be the only one saying he did. Not just a vague "well those things existed and GINA could have been used".

[Mblake81]

I don't know if this adds much to the conversation, but I was making a pretty comfortable living at the time as a consultant in NYC (don't be too impressed, with Y2K, anyone with any skill was getting work). If I had found something commercially available, I certainly would have bought it instead of rolling my own.

But really guys, writing something to display timers based on a stuff in a text file takes near to no skill at all. Even back in 1999, it could literally be a "learn to code" project that you would tackle after hello world. Saying that nobody but me thought of it or had the capability is a really, really big stretch.

You have made two posts now trying to calm me down because of how excited you think I am about your skills.

Careful, friend. Before I start smelling troll blood. You shouldn't have to do this.

[dekova]

Yes, I agree. There should be more than one guy stepping forward making the claim that not only did he use one but he also wrote one and used it on a second computer (after someone asked how they displayed it since EQ could not be windowed..)

There are plenty of in era players on this forum, he shouldn't be the only one saying he did. Not just a vague "well those things existed and GINA could have been used".

For what it's worth, I mentioned using a log parser with a UI "back in the day" in a post before this thread was created.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2987383#post2987383
I'm fine with people using Gina. Not that much different from the log parser I used back in the day. The UI is much prettier though.

And... I'm pretty sure that I mentioned using two computers before he did. Happy to be proven wrong on this though.
I was one of those guys who had a really crappy log reader setup. Two computers, a shared directory, and my really shity attempt at programming something in Java Swing.

[Mblake81]

For what it's worth, I mentioned using a log parser with a UI "back in the day" in a post before this thread was created.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2987383#post2987383

The one guy making the claim has quoted himself saying it doesn't bother him.

Which server did you play on and what kind of computer was the second one that you used to display the information?

How did you use this and how did it help you to manage your mezzes? I ask because playing the game was keeping a mental track of them. The game itself didn't provide the information for the player, if that was the intention then it would have been displayed by the developers. The game didn't have this information displayed so it was up to the player to remember.

[dekova]

I quoted myself to show I was talking about log parsing and UI rendering before this thread was created. Essentially I'm trying to show you that I wasn't just making stuff up to argue with you.

I played on multiple servers. Don't remember which. As they launched new servers I tended to restart.

How did I use it? It read logs and displayed timers.



So is any of this innacurate?

For what it's worth, I mentioned using a log parser with a UI "back in the day" in a post before this thread was created.
https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2987383#post2987383
I'm fine with people using Gina. Not that much different from the log parser I used back in the day. The UI is much prettier though.

And... I'm pretty sure that I mentioned using two computers before he did. Happy to be proven wrong on this though.
I was one of those guys who had a really crappy log reader setup. Two computers, a shared directory, and my really shity attempt at programming something in Java Swing.

[Mblake81]

Essentially I'm trying to show you that I wasn't just making stuff up to argue with you.

I'm fine with people using Gina. Not that much different from the log parser I used back in the day. The UI is much prettier though.

What did the UI look like on your second computer monitor?

[Mblake81]

I screwed up the original post, too many tabs open and edited the wrong post.

And... I'm pretty sure that I mentioned using two computers before he did. Happy to be proven wrong on this though.

You weren't tabbing in and out of the game and with single core cpu the game took up your processing power. Some guys might've had a second computer to run a voice chat program but it wasn't the norm. My roommate eventually did get a second computer when he upgraded so he had two to run eq. No one in my guild used voice. Ring of Valor would take over /auc /shout and /ooc to do raids on Lady Vox..

That was me. Although it was about voice chat in this same thread. It was after that when people brought up second computers. It was a way out to explain things.

Still interested in which kind of comp it was. Recall any specs/brand?

[kylok]

Which server did you play on and what kind of computer was the second one that you used to display the information?

How did you use this and how did it help you to manage your mezzes? I ask because playing the game was keeping a mental track of them. The game itself didn't provide the information for the player, if that was the intention then it would have been displayed by the developers. The game didn't have this information displayed so it was up to the player to remember.

The type of computer he used is hardly relevant, anything running windows would do. Logically, if you were a clever person with resources back in 1999 sharing the directory over a windows network would be the easiest thing to do... it was the first thing that came to my mind when I thought about how this could be done.

You're making a pretty hefty assumption about the intention of the developers. Have you considered that they may have wanted to include this information in the UI but chose not to due to technological limitations such as too much stress on the the players hardware? Maybe this was a design goal that took a while to get around to. Perhaps it was introduced from player feedback - perhaps even players using programs they wrote themselves to display this information on a networked computer.

We will likely never know, but there are a lot of possibilities.

[Mblake81]

The type of computer he used is hardly relevant, anything running windows would do. Logically, if you were a clever person with resources back in 1999 sharing the directory over a windows network would be the easiest thing to do... it was the first thing that came to my mind when I thought about how this could be done.

You're making a pretty hefty assumption about the intention of the developers. Have you considered that they have wanted to include this information in the UI but chose not to due to technological limitations such as too much stress on the the players hardware? Maybe this was a design goal that took a while to get around to. Perhaps it was introduced from player feedback - perhaps even players using programs they wrote themselves to display this information on a networked computer.

We will likely never know, but there are a lot of possibilities.

I fully expect we will now see people claim that it was all done over a network, since that option has been put in well after the initial claims have been put forth.

It was hardly irrelevant. All of this would have been stated to begin with, knowing computer people will give the details.

Note: Stating that GINA has a nicer UI was suspicious and would point that his version of an early GINA like program had a worse UI to look it (you couldn't run it windowed to have a UI). Running a second computer what did it look like and why would it need to look nice. Asking for hardware specs to further complicate it, a computer guy with the work history he has mild bragged about just recently should be easy to recall.

[Vexenu]

From what I understand it seems that dekova would run EQ on PC1, where the game was installed, then read the logs being generated via the use of a shared drive and display the data generated from them separately on PC2. So even if this was technically possible back then, it was limited (by virture of EQ being locked to fullscreen) to those who had two computers side by side, utilizing a shared drive. Such a program would also be unable to overlay a UI element onto the play screen, which is really the main issue here.

So even if such a program existed it had several practical barriers to adoption that GINA does not:

1) Required an entire additional computer and monitor (not common or cheap in 1999)
2) Required the technical savvy to set up a shared drive
3) Of only marginal usefulness since the information could not be displayed on the actual game screen, but only on the monitor of the second PC

So even if dekova did have something like that working, it really wouldn't even be comparable to what GINA is like today, the main advantage of which is the fact that it essentially augments the existing UI with features and information that are otherwise unavailable to the player.

So basically dekova's homebrewed GINA-like program had similar barriers of entry to boxing. And boxing was heavily discussed back in the day and is well-documented and remembered. But we still have no evidence for the existence, much less widespread use of GINA-like programs.

[kylok]

From what I understand it seems that dekova would run EQ on PC1, where the game was installed, then read the logs being generated via the use of a shared drive and display the data generated from them separately on PC2. So even if this was technically possible back then, it was limited (by virture of EQ being locked to fullscreen) to those who had two computers side by side, utilizing a shared drive. Such a program would also be unable to overlay a UI element onto the play screen, which is really the main issue here.

So even if such a program existed it had several practical barriers to adoption that GINA does not:

1) Required an entire additional computer and monitor (not common or cheap in 1999)
2) Required the technical savvy to set up a shared drive
3) Of only marginal usefulness since the information could not be displayed on the actual game screen, but only on the monitor of the second PC

So even if dekova did have something like that working, it really wouldn't even be comparable to what GINA is like today, the main advantage of which is the fact that it essentially augments the existing UI with features and information that are otherwise unavailable to the player.

So basically dekova's homebrewed GINA-like program had similar barriers of entry to boxing. And boxing was heavily discussed back in the day and is well-documented and remembered. But we still have no evidence for the existence, much less widespread use of GINA-like programs.

1) I had more than one person playing EQ in my house, and had 2 computers with 2 monitors
2) It's really, really easy to share a folder on Windows - even back in 99
3) Whenever the other computer in my house were not being used I always used it to look up relevant information. If I had access to a log parser back then I definitely would have used it for that as well.

[Mblake81]

1) I had one than one person playing EQ in my house, and had 2 computers with 2 monitors
2) It's really, really easy to share a folder on Windows - even back in 99
3) Whenever the other computer in my house were not being used I always used it to look up relevant information. If I had access to a log parser back then I definitely would have used it for that as well.

1. Did you have them side by side with a log parser that displayed a UI giving real time additional information, that despite if the original developers would have liked to put it the fact is that it wasn't?

2. Share a folder, sure. But would it do what is being described?

3. Sure, I used a roommates computer to look up wiki maps that I had not printed out yet. There are no arguments about that. If you had access to a log parser you for sure would have used it? why didn't you have one?

[Izmael]

Back then, the amount of software available for EQ (or even gaming generally), was orders of magnitude lower than what is available today.

People who played EQ relatively seriously - raiding guild members etc, usually were aware of the available software and people often knew who used what. I don't remember ever hearing of GINA at all back then, before I quit in 2002.

[kylok]

They were indeed side by side. I didn't have a log parser because I was a child in 1999, I didn't even know there was a log command.

[Vexenu]

The main point stands: why is there ZERO DOCUMENTATION of anything like GINA existing back in the day? No one mentions it in forum posts. No one is able to produce a screenshot of it. If it existed at all, it was entirely a ghost. This is basically impossible, because anything that had even remotely common use would have been discussed - there is simply no way it could have spread between players otherwise!

We are told that because log parsing existed in classic we should be ok with real-time log readers that create new UI elements overlaid on the game client. How disingenuous must you be to equate these two things?

[kylok]

The main point stands: why is there ZERO DOCUMENTATION of anything like GINA existing back in the day? No one mentions it in forum posts. No one is able to produce a screenshot of it. If it existed at all, it was entirely a ghost. This is basically impossible, because anything that had even remotely common use would have been discussed - there is simply no way it could have spread between players otherwise!

We are told that because log parsing existed in classic we should be ok with real-time log readers that create new UI elements overlaid on the game client. How disingenuous must you be to equate these two things?

Log parsers existing in 1999, among other things, defends the enabling of the log file. Allowing the game to be run in a window (which is likely a compatibility thing for staff - P99 will not run in full screen for me on Linux). Both of these things combined allow for programs like GINA to function in the way that is offensive to you.

[Mblake81]

Log parsers existing in 1999, among other things, defends the enabling of the log file. Allowing the game to be run in a window (which is likely a compatibility thing for staff - P99 will not run in full screen for me on Linux). Both of these things combined allow for programs like GINA to function in the way that is offensive to you.

This is why I never asked for it to be removed or sent a PM to a Green Text to complain. It was a good thought exercise and I will be happy being able to laugh at people using something like GINA with no social recourse to defend themselves outside of laughable claims that it could have been done.

No further steps are requested to be taken. Although if you are playing without them and someone beats you to a spawn you will have to wonder if they were running some kind of timer. That some kind of dubious program could have been used justifies it being used and just got that guy the reward. Or lets say its not about loot but about a good player, is he using timers etc to help him play, does he deserve people saying that he is l33t?

[kylok]

I honestly feel like its more likely that whomever beat whomever else to a spawn set a timer on their phone than with GINA,

[Mblake81]

I honestly feel like its more likely that whomever beat whomever else to a spawn set a timer on their phone than with GINA,

Fine, I will laugh at their need to use their phones. The device at this point makes little difference, it's that they do it.

The more gaming goes on, the less it appeals. If the company that makes the game doesn't sell to you directly something that aids then someone has a program to do it... in a fantasy world role playing game of thee and thou, elfs running around a forest killing orcs.

[kylok]

Yes, everyone plays the game their way =D

[Mblake81]

Yes, everyone plays the game their way =D

I disagree. This is a game not a life philosophy. When I purchased my original copy of EQ i didn't give the cashier a funny handshake.

[dekova]

The main point stands: why is there ZERO DOCUMENTATION of anything like GINA existing back in the day? No one mentions it in forum posts. No one is able to produce a screenshot of it. If it existed at all, it was entirely a ghost. This is basically impossible, because anything that had even remotely common use would have been discussed - there is simply no way it could have spread between players otherwise!

I know that the wayback machine exists, but I don't think you can search it. It's more of a "show me this site/page as of this date" kind of functionality, right?

Is it even possible to search the web as it existed in 1999?

[sixteenmiles]

http://www.eqwatcher.com/docs/eula.html

EQWatcher was a popular log parser released in 2001. If you don’t believe this page then you can see the web archive of their free servers website going back to 2001 here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20000701000000*/eqwatcher

That fits within the blue timeline. There were others before that that don’t exist anymore. If you genuinely believe that before these big releases people weren’t writing python scripts to parse their logs...

http://eq-companion.com

EQ Companion has a change log going back to 2001.

None of this was a big secret. People weren’t hiding it.

EQLog’s website goes back to 2000: https://web.archive.org/web/20000701000000*/http://www.cws.org/~pasketti/

This took about 5 minutes for me to look back and find just by searching the names of these programs. Also, all this talk about how parsing couldn’t be possible before .NET is just weird. Lots of broad sweeping statements and assumptions being thrown around.

[Bazia]

wheres the part where it's funneled into a UI visual

EQ Companion is a program designed to monitor EverQuest log file. There are a lot of similar programs available but where EQ Companion differs from the rest is that it is designed to be running as you are playing EverQuest. It will constantly poll the log file and read new lines in and parse them in real time. This real-time monitoring obviously requires that you have 2 networked computers.

you needed two computers to even run a parser that didnt even have a UI element, yeah GINA is totally like that

[Mblake81]

http://www.eqwatcher.com/docs/eula.html

EQWatcher was a popular log parser released in 2001. If you don’t believe this page then you can see the web archive of their free servers website going back to 2001 here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20000701000000*/eqwatcher

That fits within the blue timeline. There were others before that that don’t exist anymore. If you genuinely believe that before these big releases people weren’t writing python scripts to parse their logs...

http://eq-companion.com

EQ Companion has a change log going back to 2001.

None of this was a big secret. People weren’t hiding it.

EQLog’s website goes back to 2000: https://web.archive.org/web/20000701000000*/http://www.cws.org/~pasketti/

This took about 5 minutes for me to look back and find just by searching the names of these programs. Also, all this talk about how parsing couldn’t be possible before .NET is just weird. Lots of broad sweeping statements and assumptions being thrown around.

Um, that was me talking about .Net. I didn't claim that it couldn't be done, I posted that in regards to GINAs creation date as I was searching for it. So you will have to reconsider that accusation.

Eqwatcher, does parsing with text to voice alerts. (http://eqwatcherbeta.tripod.com/eqwatcher_advanced_window.htm)

EQWatcher Evolution is an absolutely free real-time EverQuest log parser. EQWatcher interprets small programs written for it that do certain things, most notably audio responses such as Text-to-Speech or .WAV sounds, when user or game text input is read. For example, EQWatcher Evolution can speak out loud things like your character's damage per second, your character's movement speed, tells received, all using information from the text log files. EQWatcher's abilities also allow advanced uses like accessing databases, and simple-but-useful things like controlling Winamp. EQWatcher by design CANNOT be used to "macro" (automate game play), hack, or sniff packets, and is not against the license agreement for EverQuest.

It couldn't display a UI. The one poster in here that I was arguing with had a program with a UI on a extra computer displaying accurately but janky in real time. EQwatcher didn't require a UI overlay. It doesn't do egg timers for buff durations or spawn times. If someone hails you, you can make a voice alert. This could be set up to give triggered alerts, like raid alerts or even group invites.

You have shown a program that many others didn't bother to link, kudos. But it fails to demonstrate how GINA can be acceptable but by all means use something like Eqwatcher if you really need voice triggers.

Edit: It could control Winamp (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HaF-nRS_CWM)

[dekova]

The one poster in here that I was arguing with had a program with a UI on a extra computer displaying accurately but janky in real time.

Hey! That was me. I like to think we were having a discussion.

It doesn't do egg timers for buff durations or spawn times.

Looks like it was capable of doing timers.

[sixteenmiles]

I don’t know who said what, I’m just responding to the general sentiment that people didn’t do log parsing in classic, when they did. As for UI stuff, I don’t really remember because it all blurs together. There were definitely UI and DPS overlays but without getting ahold of or installing one of these softwares with a version from back then, I couldn’t say if it was classic or not.

[Mblake81]

Looks like it was capable of doing timers.

I stand corrected.

Timers are exactly what you would expect them to be. They wait a certain amount of time and then do something (generally they will just play a sound). Once it's time is up and the action has been completed, the timer poofs into thin air and no longer exists (If you used EQWatcher 1.76, you may have gotten used to timers that were permanent, and were attached to triggers. It is still possible to make these triggered timers, as explained in the conversion section of installation.)

I have attempted to make timers simple enough in EQWatcher Evolution that they can be used to easily time your food you have warming up in the microwave as you slave away at the game, without having to put too much thought into setting up the timer. So, go make pop that pizza in the oven and set up your EQWatcher Evolution timer to warn you so you don't pull 4 too many mobs for your group's enchanter just as your pizza is about to be done. No burnt food here please.

Seriously now, on to the guts.

EQWatcher Evolution timers have the following characteristics, in no particular order: Name, Time, Action Type, Action Data. Timers can be set to play a wav, a CD track, an mp3, speak some text, or execute an alias.

Edit: Was there an Eqwatcher and later an EQwatcher evolution that added more features? I will have to check into this.

[Mblake81]

I don’t know who said what, I’m just responding to the general sentiment that people didn’t do log parsing in classic, when they did. As for UI stuff, I don’t really remember because it all blurs together. There were definitely UI and DPS overlays but without getting ahold of or installing one of these softwares with a version from back then, I couldn’t say if it was classic or not.

How did the overlays work when EQ could not be windowed, was there some kind of bypass?

Gamparse and GINA require the use of windowed EQ even on P99.

[Vexenu]

I don’t know who said what, I’m just responding to the general sentiment that people didn’t do log parsing in classic

Literally no one is saying this.

Log parsing = classic
Real-time log reading = arguably classic
Real-time log reading with output to UI overlay = not remotely classic

[dekova]

Literally no one is saying this.

Log parsing = classic
Real-time log reading = arguably classic
Real-time log reading with output to UI overlay = not remotely classic

Take out the work overlay and it's exactly what I was doing in 1999.

[Mblake81]

Take out the work overlay and it's exactly what I was doing in 1999.

Wait, didn't you say you were using a UI on a second computer?

err, why did you require a second computer when Eqwatcher can run on the same computer EQ does?

[dekova]

Wait, didn't you say you were using a UI on a second computer?

Yep, that's why you need to take out the word overlay. The UI wasn't overlayed on top of Everquest.

err, why did you require a second computer when Eqwatcher can run on the same computer EQ does?

Maybe they were smarter than I was.

[Mblake81]

Yep, that's why you need to take out the word overlay. The UI wasn't overlayed on top of Everquest.

I will admit I am confused.

You did use an overlay but it was on the second computer right or do I have that backwards?

Edit: It wouldn't be an overlay just a display screen. It wouldn't be overlaying on anything. Correction on my part.

[dekova]

I will admit I am confused.

You did use an overlay but it was on the second computer right or do I have that backwards?

I had a UI. A user interface. It was a java app that showed timers and stuff. It was on that second monitor, not "overlaid" on the everquest UI.

I think he's using the word "overlay" to mean data drawn on top of the everquest UI. That I didn't do.

[Mblake81]

I had a UI. A user interface. It was a java app that showed timers and stuff. It was on that second monitor, not "overlaid" on the everquest UI.

I think he's using the word "overlay" to mean data drawn on top of the everquest UI. That I didn't do.

Well, that is what we were arguing about. You had to have a second computer connected somehow to the main computer running EQ to display visual information. If you were running a basic text to voice it didn't require that. Hence my prolonged stubborn argument. There wouldn't be any screenshots because those original programs were just voice through the speakers. DING DING "The cool breeze fades". It's just reading aloud what the player didn't bother reading.

I am still curious what version of this was out in era and what were its capabilities. The Evolution in EQwatcher makes me think its an evolved version.

[dekova]

DING DING "The cool breeze fades". It's just reading aloud what the player didn't bother reading.

Except for the part about timers.

I am still curious what version of this was out in era and what were its capabilities.

I'm not. I popped in just to give my first-hand experience about log reading and timers in 1999. Hope you guys found the information useful and/or enlightening. Don't know that I have much more to add. Hope to see you guys on Green, looking forward to playing a sexy Ogre Shaman, or maybe a halfling cleric, or a Human ranger. Oh God the choices.

[joradthepally]

GINA triggers was just an alert system that would let you know like: if "Soandso is enraged" trigger a specific sound. It was specifically more useful when you had to rely on Raid Targets saying a specific line before a big AE Rampage, GINA would see that message and play an alarm, in case you know you are usually slow to react to something like that.

[Mblake81]

Except for the part about timers.



I'm not. I popped in just to give my first-hand experience about log reading and timers in 1999. Hope you guys found the information useful and/or enlightening. Don't know that I have much more to add. Hope to see you guys on Green, looking forward to playing a sexy Ogre Shaman, or maybe a halfling cleric, or a Human ranger. Oh God the choices.

Sure, what I take away from this is there were parsers and timers in era. These would have been text to voice only, you wouldn't see a visible timer letting you know how much longer something has. You would get an audible message when its time though. A fellow player couldn't ask how much longer something has, only if its beeped yet.

In your case, you had some setup letting it work on a secondary computer. Very uncommon and I wouldn't accept this as fact. What I can accept as fact were the voice to text programs, which while they had some similar functions to GINA they did not provide what it does.

Also i would like to go back and address something brought up earlier in this thread, concerning voice chat.

Some quick and important information about EQ [12.12.2003] (https://web.archive.org/web/20040320092158/http://teqim.sourceforge.net/)

As many of you know, EverQuest is a horrible CPU hog. As fewer of you know, it doesn't need to be. EverQuest currently fights furiously with your computer to eat every possible nanosecond of CPU processing time. This is very bad for your system overall. For example, your CPU is generating much more heat than it should be, and can cause rampant overheating. Other applications are bullied around like school children giving up lunch money (including system drivers, for things like winmodems -- this prevents winmodem users from even PLAYING the game). What needs to happen, you ask? Very simple. As discovered and mentioned through more questionable methods, EverQuest has a "main loop", where it processes everything needed for EverQuest to function. It is this loop that runs continuously that refuses to yield the CPU even for necessary system functionality. The EQ dev team could insert the line "Sleep(0);" into the loop at any point, and this would give up enough CPU time for the system to function properly, without giving up any of your framerate. This would allow you to open up your web browser without it taking 10 minutes, it would allow winmodem users to play the game, etc. Furthermore, allowing an option to reduce CPU time by increasing the amount of Sleep would be extremely beneficial for overheating and power usage. This Sleep also drastically reduces many forms of lag in the game, and actually allows you to run multiple sessions of EverQuest on the same computer much more smoothly. As an EverQuest player you should be concerned about EverQuest playing nice with your system. Post on the EverQuest station boards, contact your GM, email SOE, do what needs to be done for them to read this message and give a little back to your computer for all the hard work it has done playing the game :)

We didn't have multi-core CPU's

This was all the way into 2003. This lines up with the anecdote I posted earlier about a friend who worked for a local telecom, Jordan was his name. Voice chat would have been laggy at best during the dial up days even though some used it, I would call foul if you used RogerWilco while running EQ between 99-2001.

If you had a second computer and additional phone line/very early adopter of cable to have a router then I might believe you but I still pass on it being accepted. Like the guy above, you had very special circumstances. Indeed the 1%. It might be something to ignore if it was still 1% of the playerbase being 3l33t but when everyone is doing it then it changes things. Recharges was also something in era that 1% knew about but I would support removing it on Green, its no longer just a few doing it to be winners.

Loose lips sink ships.

[BlackBellamy]

Log parsing (which is definitely classic) is simply not in the same universe as real-time log reading software that renders data into a UI.


You know what IS classic? Dll injection. So if I produce screenshots of people in 2000 sucking data from their client they were never meant to see, would you support me in bringing back that functionality?

[kylok]

MQ is very classic, I remember it being used in 2000

[dekova]

You know what IS classic? Dll injection. So if I produce screenshots of people in 2000 sucking data from their client they were never meant to see, would you support me in bringing back that functionality?

Log reading has never been against the rules of the game. DLL injection or playing with the game's memory space has always been a banable offense.

And you wouldn't be "bringing it back", I'm pretty sure there are people still doing it.

[oldhead]

I used to be pretty ok with it. What do you need done?

[solidious77]

I used to be pretty ok with it. What do you need done?

I've spent a long time trying myself, and I'm still not sure if my desired result is even possible. From the Gina references I've found it seems powerful but as it only parses the log, I'm not sure it can differentiate mobs with the same name both for the timer and for the timer title?

{S} lists the mobs name, but the issue is the timer resetting if I root another mob with the same name (as it re-triggers the search criteria). Of course you can configure it to start a new timer per mob even if the name is the same:

1:50 Root - A Fire Beetle
2:00 Root - A Fire Beetle

..but they are not exactly distinct, and if mob A dies then timer on mob B ends etc.

It would be sweet to make it distinct so if you root mob A, it has a timer for mob A regardless of same names on mobs B, C, D etc. What I'm looking for is a unique identifier to each mob so the timer won't reset should I root two mobs with the same name. I've messed around with {s1} but I don't see how its any different from {s}

It would be nice to append the number or variable to distinguish which mob the timer is referring to:

Ie.
1:50 Root - A Fire Beetle #1
2:00 Root - A Fire Beetle #2

[zodias]

Log parsing is powerful. If you put /loc on a frequently used key guess what? You can easily read a log file read the coordinates and place a marker on a map. Add in sense heading check and you have a fully functional minimap.

[Baler]

anti text parse people be like
https://i.imgur.com/JnClPe2.gif

[kabouter]

Log parsing is powerful. If you put /loc on a frequently used key guess what? You can easily read a log file read the coordinates and place a marker on a map. Add in sense heading check and you have a fully functional minimap.

There is already a program out there that does exactly this and it is allowed if I'm not mistaken.

[Chryorn]

I made my first overlay. A Harm Touch cooldown. Useful and a visual that is supposed to be partly in game, but I just don't like the look. Too sci fi. I don't like Duxa either because it just doesn't look right to me.

[Stabulous]

I've spent a long time trying myself, and I'm still not sure if my desired result is even possible. From the Gina references I've found it seems powerful but as it only parses the log, I'm not sure it can differentiate mobs with the same name both for the timer and for the timer title?

{S} lists the mobs name, but the issue is the timer resetting if I root another mob with the same name (as it re-triggers the search criteria). Of course you can configure it to start a new timer per mob even if the name is the same:

1:50 Root - A Fire Beetle
2:00 Root - A Fire Beetle

..but they are not exactly distinct, and if mob A dies then timer on mob B ends etc.

It would be sweet to make it distinct so if you root mob A, it has a timer for mob A regardless of same names on mobs B, C, D etc. What I'm looking for is a unique identifier to each mob so the timer won't reset should I root two mobs with the same name. I've messed around with {s1} but I don't see how its any different from {s}

It would be nice to append the number or variable to distinguish which mob the timer is referring to:

Ie.
1:50 Root - A Fire Beetle #1
2:00 Root - A Fire Beetle #2

I was interested in something like this too. You can't use the reset timer if refreshed option on something like mez because if you mez 2 mobs with the same name the second one you mez will just refresh your first timer as if you were just refreshing a mez on the same target. On the other hand if you use the create new timer each time option and do refresh a mez on the same mob you'll end up having multiple timers for the same mob.

Another issue I've run into is if you have multiple of the same class around. Like if I have a timer for my charm, but another enchanter charms a mob close enough to me for my log to pick it up, I'll get a timer for their charm as well. Is there any way around this?

[Chryorn]

Another issue I've run into is if you have multiple of the same class around. Like if I have a timer for my charm, but another enchanter charms a mob close enough to me for my log to pick it up, I'll get a timer for their charm as well. Is there any way around this?
I thought about that when I set up my HT cooldown. If you use casting macros you can add something that identifies your casts and put that identifier into the search string in addition to the standard spell message. Probably not a 100% solution but the only way that I see.

[dekova]

anti text parse people be like
https://i.imgur.com/JnClPe2.gif

While I enjoy having access to my logs and all that entails, I would encourage you to not be an ass to people who don't share our opinion.

Respect for people with dissenting opinions is a sign of emotional maturity.

[oldhead]

There is already a program out there that does exactly this and it is allowed if I'm not mistaken.

At first I was like... WHERE CAN I GET?! Then I remember i know just about every square inch of the game so not much use.

[kylok]

At first I was like... WHERE CAN I GET?! Then I remember i know just about every square inch of the game so not much use.

Even after all these years, I still get lost in Warsilks woods

[Baler]

While I enjoy having access to my logs and all that entails, I would encourage you to not be an ass to people who don't share our opinion.

Respect for people with dissenting opinions is a sign of emotional maturity.

Then they too should have the emotional maturity to not cry about an optional program that everyone doesn't use.

I'm not the best with words but I know you're smart enough to understand what I mean.

[zaneosak]

Does this vagina program have access to any data in a log file that doesn't get presented on the screen inside EQ? Like if I am level 1 and cast a heal it does not show me the value of the heal, would this log parser have this value somewhere or I only get what I can witness via the game? Asking for a friend who can't see DoT damage on green.

[Hokojin]

GINA just reads your log file which is an output of everything that would be displayed in your chat windows and nothing else, if that answers your question.

[Frug]

Does this vagina program have access to any data in a log file that doesn't get presented on the screen inside EQ? Like if I am level 1 and cast a heal it does not show me the value of the heal, would this log parser have this value somewhere or I only get what I can witness via the game? Asking for a friend who can't see DoT damage on green.

it only shows what you can see in chat, so ... no.

Also, not vagina, no matter how much you wish it so.