Messages

901

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Original SCI syntax

« on: January 06, 2011, 02:12:13 AM »

If you recall around mid-December I mentioned the "feature writer" feature in the QFG2 debug mode. I was thinking about this last night and cross referencing it with SCI Companion code syntax. One thing that immediately jumps out is the naming of the classes. In my debug session, I was able to generate a file that contained a basic definition of a Prop, Actor, PicView, View and Feature. These were the actual class names that it generated. If I look inside the Feature.sc script (998) in SCI Companion, the names of the equivalent classes are: Prop, Act, PV, View and Feature. Note the difference in the case of PicView and Actor. What this suggests to me is that classes had both a longer more readable name and perhaps an optional shorter name. It appears that the longer name might be lost during the compilation if a shorter name is provided.

Looking through the system classes in the template game, there are a lot of cases of class names that have been abbreviated/truncated and that I suspect are not what appeared in the original source. Class names such as Blk, Collect, even Obj.   The list goes on:  Rm, Rgn, SL. CT.

The QFG2 generated source provides evidence in the case of PicView and Actor that there was some amount of abbreviation but it wasn't always used it appears (e.g. View, Prop, Feature). It seems likely then that there was an optional way of specifying that shorter name that would then be used in the compiled code.

902

The Games and other Sierra Adventure stuff / Re: SCI Game Debug Modes

« on: January 06, 2011, 01:50:24 AM »

Looks like that LSL7 info originally came from Al Lowe's web site:

http://www.allowe.com/Larry/7teleport.htm

It makes sense that it should be consistent with SQ6 and GK2. Wonder why Al is saying something different? Perhaps a version at some point did work like that.

903

SCI Development Tools / Re: SCI Decompiler?

« on: January 05, 2011, 05:05:55 PM »

Actually the better approach was to use UNLZEXE to obtain the original uncompressed SCIV.EXE file. After having done this, I can now clearly see the version number in the file:

0.000.685

So the interpreter packaged with SCI Companion is 0.000.685.

Just did the same for SCI Studio and it is also 0.000.685.

Maybe earlier versions of SCI Studio used 0.000.572. It seems like the SCI specs and potentially the template game could have been based on that version.

904

SCI Development Tools / Re: SCI Decompiler?

« on: January 05, 2011, 04:50:42 PM »

I believe that the template game was made from LSL3. The Free SCI documentation IDs LSL3 as 0.000.572, which is what mine shows. 0.000.685 covers SQ3, Camelot and ICEMAN.

Ah, just seen this post from back in November that seems to confirm 0.000.572 as being the template game version:

http://sciprogramming.com/community/index.php/topic,309.msg1617.html#msg1617

...although, having said this, I just found this post that seems to suggest it is 0.000.685:

http://sciprogramming.com/community/index.php/topic,50.msg113.html#msg113

...but then this next page seems to suggest a close connection between the SCI0 specifications and version 0.000.572:

http://wiki.scummvm.org/index.php/SCI/Specifications/Graphics/SCI_Ports

I'm fairly sure I saw the string .685 in the SCIV.EXE executable that comes bundled with both SCI Studio and SCI Companion, but that doesn't mean that the template game was based on that version. Perhaps the template game was based on 0.000.572 but the interpreter version packaged with the IDEs is 0.000.685. Unfortunately the SCIV.EXE is a compressed EXE by the looks of it, so the full strings are not fully visible enough for me to be sure of the version. Might need to fire up DOSBOX and see if I can get the interpreter to display the version.

905

The Games and other Sierra Adventure stuff / Re: SCI Game Debug Modes

« on: January 05, 2011, 04:26:46 PM »

I had Space Quest 6 when it came out. In theory I should still have it but when I moved house last year I couldn't find the actual CD. All I found was box with the manual and nothing else. Never actually finished that game. It didn't feel like the old SQ games.

"Creating an empty CLASSES file"...  that sounds quite obscure.

Apparently something similar exists for LSL7 (http://tawmis.com/onlinesierra/eggsandcheats.html):

Leisure Suit Larry VII:

Teleporting around...
Start Notepad.
Type nothing. Just do a

906

SCI Development Tools / Re: SCI Decompiler?

« on: January 04, 2011, 06:13:09 PM »

0.000.685?

I found the string .685 in the SCIV.EXE, so I'm guessing this is the one.

907

SCI Development Tools / Re: SCI Decompiler?

« on: January 04, 2011, 06:02:56 PM »

I'm sure this information must be available somewhere, but to save me having to search for it, does anyone know off the top of their heads what exact version of the SCI interpreter that SCI Studio and SCI Companion are intended to support?

908

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Original SCI syntax

« on: January 04, 2011, 03:06:22 PM »

I used to have a copy of this book (though not the first edition, mine covered KQ4 which was pictured on the back cover).  It kills me that I just gave it away a few years back.

Are you sure it wasn't the first edition? The first edition did cover KQ4, in fact all the code snippets and screen shots were from KQ4. What I meant by the book providing evidence that SCI stood for something other than Sierra Creative Interpreter before the release of KQ4 is because the book must have been written at the time that the SCI version of KQ4 was being worked on and most likely before its release. Even though the book was apparently published in Nov 1988, the intro by Roberta was dated in May of that year.

Still haven't heard back from the seller yet.

909

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Original SCI syntax

« on: January 03, 2011, 05:26:48 PM »

The web site is (not surprisingly) Amazon. Here is the link:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0874551552/ref=dp_olp_collectible?ie=UTF8&qid=1294093206&sr=8-1&condition=collectible

I just tried buying this book but it is telling me that it cannot be shipped to my shipping address. I assume that this is because I live outside of the US. I have sent a message to the seller asking why this restriction is in place because I can't see why a book as small as this cannot be sent overseas. If I have no luck with the seller then someone else in the US is welcome to buy it instead. Remember though that I'm not convinced it will be any different from the printing 4 that I've seen. More than likely it will also have AGI code in it since the same edition should usually be mostly the same. The reason I wanted to purchase the first printing is to completely rule out this book.

910

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Original SCI syntax

« on: January 03, 2011, 04:47:01 PM »

I can't stand a mystery like this sitting around unsolved. Although I seem to remember it being from a Police Quest game, there is still something not quite right about this Official Book of King's Quest.

I've just realised that not all first editions are created equal. There can be different printings of a particular edition. The one I'm looking at some scans from at the moment (I have scans from two different people now) is printing 4 of the first edition.

Here are some definitions:

"Strictly speaking, an edition compromises all copies of a book printed at any time from one setting-up of type without substantial change."

A printing [also known as] "an impression compromises the whole number of copies of that edition printed at one time, without the type or plates being removed from the press."

The "without substantial change" is something worth considering here. I wouldn't put it past the publishers to have switched the SCI code for AGI code after one of the early printings. The reason I suggest this is because the text around the AGI code is all SCI related. It talks about SCI classes and SCI concepts. Everything else in the book is SCI related (e.g. screen shots of the original SCI picture and view editors) but the code snippets are AGI!!! It doesn't make sense. Here is a snippet from the book to show what I mean:

"He does this using a special computer language called SCI (SCript Interpreter) developed by Sierra. SCI is an object-oriented language similar to LISP; it's written in Assembler, C, and itself. An older version of the interpreter, called Adventure Game Interpreter (AGI), was used to create King's Quests I, II, and / / / and the 256K version of King's Quest IV. With SCI the programmer establishes classes of objects. The Actor Class, for example, includes anything that moves such as sea gulls, ogres, and Ego. The Props Class is composed of items that move but don't go anywhere

911

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Original SCI syntax

« on: January 02, 2011, 04:11:02 PM »

Did Dark Fiber mention exactly what book?

Hmmm. Yes, I'll have to go back to him again though because it appears he is also wrong about what book it was. He also thought it was The Official Book of King's Quest. Here is what he said:

"Yeah its in the official book of kings quest. If she does not know the difference... but its SCI code. Looks like LISP. Its the book I dont have but I know its in there."

The scans I was sent were definitely AGI code though. It wasn't LISP-like at all. It was the very same AGI code that I based a lot of my decisions on when I wrote the SHOWLOG utility back in 95-97 and therefore I guess ultimately what led to the compiler that Peter Kelly wrote.

I still have a vague recollection though that it might have been a Police Quest game that the SCI code was for. I might be wrong about that though. Memories are not the best things to go on. We need something solid.

912

SCI Syntax Help / Original SCI syntax

« on: January 02, 2011, 01:07:34 PM »

I thought I should start a new topic for the discussion we were having regarding the original SCI syntax. It is not good news I'm afraid. Both of the leads I had on getting that SCI code from the Sierra book have come to nothing. Kimme has kindly scanned the code that she thought was SCI code and it is as I suspected, which is that it isn't SCI code but is instead AGI code. It appears that Kimme has exactly the same version of TOBOKQ that I have. As I mentioned earlier, Kimme has also checked Kings Quest Companion 1st and 2nd editions and neither of these had SCI code.

I've also heard back from Dark Fiber and he is now saying that the book with the SCI code in it is the one that he doesn't have but he still says that it exists. I also know that something with SCI code in it did exist at some point. We'll just have to keep searching.

913

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Vocab.900 - The 'Black Box'

« on: December 28, 2010, 07:29:06 AM »

I've gone back to ask the question, but the more I think about it, the more I'm thinking that this might end up being a red herring as well. I've included below Kimme's exact response:

"in the first edition of "The Official Book of King's Quest" by Donald
B. Trivette, there are SCI code snippets for smoke, opening/closing a
house door, and falling on rocks in the "Script Interpreter" section of
"Chapter 2: The Making of King's Quest 4" (pages 17 to 20).

The 2nd edition doesn't have the codes reprinted. It just has a small
snippet of older AGI coding demonstrating how smoke moves in "Chapter 2:
The Making of Quests" (page 20)."

The reason I am starting to think that it might be a red herring is because I clearly remember that my copy of The Official Book of King's Quest had code in it for "smoke", "falling on rocks", and "opening and closing a house door", i.e. all of the things that Kimme mentions as being SCI code. My copy had AGI code though. Kimme says that the 2nd edition only had AGI code for the smoke but I'm certain my copy had AGI code for the others as well. So unless there is an in between edition (i.e. a first edition with the code changed to AGI instead) then I think it might end up being AGI code that she has seen. I've sent her some examples of AGI and SCI code, highlighting the differences, so that she can verify which it is that she saw. I forget that not all Sierra fans know what AGI and SCI code looks like.

914

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Vocab.900 - The 'Black Box'

« on: December 28, 2010, 06:58:45 AM »

Could she scan it for us?

I'll ask the question and see what she says. At the very least I'd imagine that she could maybe send us a couple of lines to verify that it is indeed SCI code. It is possible that she has mistakenly identified AGI code as SCI code. Unfortunately I don't have my copy of The Official Book of King's Quest on this side of the planet (it's in New Zealand and I'm living in England at the moment), so I don't know for sure if my copy is a first or second edition. I know that my copy has more than one snippet of AGI code but definitely no SCI code. I remember thinking at the time I bought it that it was strange that it didn't have SCI code because all the photos of the tools (picture editor, view editor) were of the SCI tools, and I seem to recall that the discussion in the book about the "making of" King's Quest was related to the SCI version....   and yet all the code snippets were AGI. I guess that supports what kimme is saying about the second edition having the older AGI code. I'll go back to her and ask a few questions.

Dark Fiber should be able to give us his report in the next day or so.

915

SCI Syntax Help / Re: Vocab.900 - The 'Black Box'

« on: December 28, 2010, 01:59:20 AM »

I'm still waiting for confirmation from Dark Fiber but in the meantime I have contacted kimme at sierraplanet, who has a copy of many Sierra related books. The outcome of this is that King's Quest Companion is a red herring. The 1st and 2nd editions contain no SCI code at all. What kimme claims though is that the 1st edition of The Official Book of King's Quest has SCI code. Kimme says that the 2nd edition is missing the SCI code and instead has the older AGI code. This makes me think that I must have the second edition not the first because my edition only has AGI code.