Talk:List of opcodes

spaceeinstein, I would love if you will check all those opcodes I marked as needed to be confirmed =) As I don't have GTA III/VC installed right now, and doing all researches basing upon the disassembled exe file. Seemann^?!

Oh wow, it's amazing how correct most of them are. I didn't know that you didn't have them installed. I was on vacation for a week and was only able to test some opcodes for III. The ones I had tested so far work great. I have VC installed on this computer so I can test VC anytime. In two weeks I might be able to test more for III if I have the time/motivation. It's surprising how many of these useful opcodes are just removed in later games.--Spaceeinstein 20:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

• 01F8 - confirmed, 2nd param is the number
• 021F - confirmed, taxi lights only light up on newly spawned taxis, not old ones
• 021A - confirmed, last param doesn't seem to do anything but it creates a garage nonetheless, crashes in VC
• 0251 - confirmed
• 0252 - confirmed
• 02BA - tried but no noticeable effect, params seem correct as the game didn't crash
• 02BB - tried but no noticeable effect, params seem correct as the game didn't crash
• 02DA - confirmed, only difference is that there is no model, it can only create one pickup, use it again and it moves the old one to the new location

Ok, thanks. Some of opcodes still need to be tested (013b, 013c, 0195, etc...), hope you will find time to sort them out. ;) And I see there are opcodes meant of being unsupported while they actually work. I'm about 0292, 0295. I wonder on how many hidden opcodes still can be there... Seemann^?! 20:46, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

It's kind of straining getting all this information accurately in a list. I know there are many mistakes but have not caught enough of them. Thanks for fixing some of my errors.--Spaceeinstein 21:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

• 013B - no noticeable effect, expecting 013C to be the same so I didn't test it
• 0163 - confirmed
• 0195 - no noticeable effect
• 0196 - it just deleted the actor
• 023E - crashes game, I used 0 and 1 for the second param and they both crashed
• 02C4 - no noticeable effect

unused in

In my opinion this comment is useless and just make this page heavier. Who cares about was an opcode used by Rockstar or not? It's not so hard to run the search over the original scm to check this out (if you really wanna code smth). Seemann^?! 05:52, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

It's a little trivial information about it. They're from the comments in the old INI file. I find interesting at the amount of unused opcodes in the game. If it really make the page look that messy, I can remove them.--Spaceeinstein 06:35, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

color coding

???--Spaceeinstein 00:44, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

SET	opcodes that set something
GET	opcodes that get the value of something
CHECK	opcodes that check for something
CREATE	opcodes that create something
MATH	opcodes that are purely mathematical
OTHER	opcodes that don't fit the above

Needs templatizing.

Navi templates

...are they supposed to be used in the opcode articles? --Aschratt - oO 07:08, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

I think they should only be used on pages with dense content.--Spaceeinstein 08:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

00C5 to 00D5

What's the status of opcodes between 00C5 and 00D5 for SA? Are they unused, unsupported, or used? I hadn't realize before that those were missing from the unsupported/unused tables for SA. Those opcodes didn't appear in VC and III so I had assumed they were unsupported. But I just tested some of them in that range in VC and they didn't crash the game and produce no effect.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 20:31, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

In SA they do not exist = unsupported. Using them is not allowed. Seemann (talk) 21:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

GTA3 opcodes

I've checked the GTA III opcodes to find out which are supported and which are not. Mostly the list is correct, though I found some missing ones:

• 0136 - was not listed; described here
• 015b, 03e9, 0364 work in III
• 0385 - does not work in III

probably SCM.ini needs updating as well. Seemann (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

I posted the correct list of all supported/unsupported opcodes when I wrote this page years ago but my edits were overwritten overtime by other people. If you want to help, you can check this revision for the correct list. I never managed to undo all the mistakes because there were so many of them.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Well, that revision does not seem to correctly document opcodes I mentioned. 0136, 015b, 03e9, 0364 missed/unsupported there. I think the current revision is good. I hope to start VC research anytime soon, so could revise VC opcodes too. Seemann (talk) 22:24, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh, my mistake. I thought I had the list completed back then. I just checked the IDB and see that you're right. The VC opcodes should be a lot easier to confirm because Wesser's script definitions contain information on all supported/unsupported opcodes.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 22:30, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Hmm, I just checked and it seems that file wouldn't work for this. It listed 0179 as true but it doesn't seem to work in VC.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Opcodes pages suggestions?

I have gone through the majority of the opcodes pages and updated them to be as consistent, correct, and clear as possible. Does anyone have suggestions on further improvements on them?--Spaceeinstein (talk) 16:45, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for all your hard work! From the current point of view I see the only way to improve opcode articles is to add code snippets demonstrating how this opcode functions. Like 009A but make it a CLEO script so you only need to Copy-Paste the code into SB and compile (or maybe provide a downloadable .cs file). Seemann (talk) 08:40, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

The pages are titled after opcodes, plausible since the command titles are taken by RAGE pages, but what will happen once we start using hashes/dynamic opcodes instead of fixed opcodes? That is, the only fixed thing is the command name. 'Course, this will only affect the documentation of future custom commands. Additionally, what about NOPed commands? For instance, LOAD_AND_LAUNCH_MISSION maps to LOAD_AND_LAUNCH_MISSION_INTERNAL. SKIP_MISSION_START and REGISTER_STREAMED_SCRIPT though maps to SKIP_MISSION_START_INTERNAL and REGISTER_STREAMED_SCRIPT_INTERNAL, which have different amount and type of parameters. Not sure if we should create a sole page or redirect the first page into the laters? Try not to ignore the existence of the native language while producing further documentation. --Link2012 (talk) 18:57, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Having opcodes as page names had been an issue when the Stories games came out. Would you like one page like CREATE_CAR to contain information from all relevant games? It would be nice to have VCS's information on 0048 be alongside with information on 00A5's page, among others. And it would give a nice home to GTA 2's commands.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Try doing this with one command (e.g. CREATE_CAR / 00A5 / 0048) and let's see how the final result looks like. --Link2012 (talk) 21:05, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

What do you think of this?--Spaceeinstein (talk) 09:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks good! Perhaps GTA III — Vice City Stories should be something like 3D Universe and GTA IV should be HD Universe or something like that? Plus what will happen on the opcode-titled pages since we can't strictly redirect since a single opcode can be of multiple commands (due to Stories and such)? And, this seems like a bit of work, I suppose you can automate it a lot by using a script with the MediaWiki API? Link2012 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

GTA2? Really? No, seriously, who even cares? Why spend time on documenting things nobody scripts for when we have so much opcodes left undocumented especially for San Andreas? Combining 3D and HD era commands documentation in one page is a bad idea in my opinion, not only because of redirects. They are from totally different scripting engines and I see no way for scripts from 3D era to be reused in HD games. So, half a page will be useless for one group of people, and another half will be useless for the rest. Similarly, we have different sections on GTAF for 3D/HD and nobody complains. Seemann (talk) 21:31, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps in their own pages, Command Name (3D Universe), then? --Link2012 (talk) 04:09, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

That's an unfair assessment of GTA 2. I like GTA 2 and would document it if I weren't so busy with III/VC. Why should popularity factor into this? There is almost no activity on SA's opcodes documentation anyway so I doubt completion of them can be a goal.--Spaceeinstein (talk) 14:15, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

I do like GTA2 too, and sure it's worth being documented much like 3D/HD games. After all, every game in GTA series deserves complete documentation and this is the goal of this site. So it's all about priorities. My opinion is that we have to make efforts on documenting games that are still moddable these days (like III/VC/SA and V), then on all others. And my point is that choosing between yet another rework of existing opcode articles and adding new ones I would choose the second option. I don't see how renaming articles would help people to better understand opcodes functionality. Seemann (talk) 11:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

---

CREATE_CAR is a command that creates a vehicle at the location.

Contents

table of contents

GTA 2

Syntax

CREATE_CAR ...

Parameters

...

Return

none

Description

...further information...

Example

...

See also

...if applicable...

GTA III — Vice City Stories

Syntax

CREATE_CAR ...

Sanny Builder

•    00A5 ...
• 0048 ...

Parameters

...

Return

none

Description

...further information...

Example

...includes GTA3script and Sanny Builder examples...

See also

...if applicable...

GTA IV

Syntax

CREATE_CAR ...

Parameters

...

Return

none

Description

...further information...

Example

...

See also

...if applicable...

Keywords

...

Categories?