anderbubble

Oh, having to change the emulator separately isn't what I'm on about. After all: they both use Retroarch. But since I haven't imported any games as Nintendo Famicom, there's no Nintendo Famicom platform available in the batch editor. If I *import* a game I'm presented with a list of default platforms, and those get auto-populated as I use them; but those default platforms aren't available for selection in the batch editor unless they've been used previously.

@Jason Carr The bigger problem was getting it to recognize that roms had been removed, not added. For example, when I removed roms that weren't part of the no-intro set. Until I found "scan for removed roms" the only way to do this sanely was to delete the platform and re-import, which is also a big metadata download. Tangentially, though, it would be nice if I could use the audit tool to import into an as-yet not-autogenerated platform. For example, I'm about to split my NES platform into NES and Famicom. If I import a game as a Famicom game, it auto-populates a default platform to use; but if I use the audit tool to bulk-edit all my (Japan) NES games from NES to Famicom, I have to manually define the Famicom platform. I'd say it should behave more like the emulator interface, where if you create a Retroarch emulator it auto-populates with default cores for each platform. That wasn't terribly discoverable, but at least it worked. Unless I'm missing something. Like I said, I'm new to LaunchBox.

Thanks for the response, @Jason Carr. For what it's worth, I didn't mean to advocate standardizing on the no-intro set explicitly; just being able to read a no-intro or goodtools style datfile and compare. That said, now that I've finally found the "scan for removed roms" and "scan for added roms" features, using romcenter (or, now, clrmamepro) together with Launchbox is a lot more viable. I'm still pretty new to LaunchBox, so I'm still figuring out my workflow--let alone the intended workflow. It'd be nice to not have to jump back and forth between different tools; but at least I don't have to delete an entire platform and re-import to update like my initial Google searches indicated.

I disagree that it's out-of-scope. LaunchBox isn't just a front-end or launcher, but is positioned as an organizational tool for all your games, roms or no. Effort that is going into auditing based on whatever the filename happens to be would be much better spent auditing against actual curated rom databases.

This assumes that the filenames are correct. Tools like romcenter use the content of the rom itself to match it against a database of known roms and associated metadata. Basing LaunchBox's auditing functionality on the filename means that I can't replace romcenter with launchbox, but I must first audit my roms using romcenter and then I can use the LaunchBox audit tool to interpret the metadata tagging implicit in the filename. I'd rather be able to feed a set of no-intro dat files into launchbox and have it tell me which systems roms go to, for example. And what the filenames should be. And do all the renaming and recategorizing itself.

The audit tool intro tutorial describes the audit tool as simply parsing filenames. Is that accurate? If so, what value does it bring over using the audit tool that presumably produced the audited filenames originally? It'd be great if the audit tool actually read no-intro databases or similar.