SentaiBrad

Yea, against better judgement I threw Fallout 4 on my OS'es SSD and it loads insanely faster. Previously the OS would take up 75% to 100% of my HDD's read / write according to Task Manager. Now I've never seen it get higher than 30% on the SSD, so Fallout 4 has a big playground even compared to an internal drive that I had it on. So while you'll generally hear us say to keep games on a separate drive, I agree with @DOS76 that putting just LaunchBox on the SSD along with your OS may still increase performance even with your OS on the same drive.

Not specifically there isn't something like this, but this woulcn't be something we could accuratly do till the LaunchBox Games Database is near complete (we're not the GamesDB). It's an awesome idea, but if we are missing any amount of games in a system then it's incomplete. We also don't havet all the Database features implemented yet. So this is a great great end goal.

Yep, we recognize that this has been a problem because we got the data from the GamesDB. We will be looking at ways to do something about that, as well as allow users to potentially add some of their own. Merging and using the Alternate Naming scheme that I've come up with may work in this case, because all of those names could be valid. Besides maybe a misplaced period or comma, at one point in time the Development studio could have been anyone of those names and published or developed a game under that name. So it is kind of a hard place to be in, because they're mostly valid.

wallmachine said When updating to the new Beta LaunchBox crashes. It downloads the update when its done it says LaunchBox is open and can't continue and crashes with a send/don't send dialog box. Close LaunchBox from the Windows Task Manager, open up the Updates folder in your LaunchBox folder. Sort them by date because the names are generated strings of text, and double click the newest installer matching the date you downloaded the Beta. Install over your current install of LB.

Yep, try changing playback engines in the Options to see if that makes a difference. Also check the video, there may be natural black bars on the video it's self which we wouldn't be able to fix. BigBox does show black bars in some views though, and it has to do with the size of the player and the size of the video not exactly meshing, so it creates black bars. It's common when you play a 4:3 video on a 16:9 screen in fullscreen for example. Without introducing stretching options I think there is something that might be able to do be done with the detection of the size of the window and making it stick to one aspect ratio.

nathanddrews said My experience with many front ends (I suppose computing in general) is that you want a triple threat: 1. High clock speed CPU 2. Large quantity of RAM (8GB if using 64-bit 7/8/10) 3. High read-performance storage (most SSDs) I'm not sure if it's irony, but my primary emulation PC is overkill for all my emulation needs (it's even working great for Cemu), can play most PC games very well, but still struggles from time to time with FE. :/ High Clock speed is a misnomer though. If you have a CPU that is 10 years old (@Rincewind has a Pro 2 Duo) then it could be any clock speed and it really wont matter. LaunchBox is multi-threaded If I recall, so it can utilize more than 1 core, but the computations your CPU is doing is a lot lower than a newer chip. Assuming this is an older Pro 2 Duo, because they stopped producing this a while ago, a first gen i3 (Dual Core) at even 2.8Ghz or 2.5Ghz would be a better CPU. Again assuming this is an older model. Even if it is a newer CPU, within the last 5-7 years, a generation or two older CPU could still be a gigantic upgrade without breaking the bank. My point being, if you are just wanting to do emulation you can get a low end PC and still be able to be fine. LaunchBox requires more than a user thinks and if you start to have a 10k, 20k, 30k library then performance will start to drastically take a hit. If your External is USB3, it is less of a big deal. However, I also have a feeling it's not so then yea that can effect the performance. A USB2 drive has a low read / write so LaunchBox may be throwing data at it that the drive can't keep up with.

To get rid of the Black Bars? You can't really. Try VLC or WMP playback engines in different views, see what works best for you. We may be able to work on that in the future so that 4:3 video doesn't get black bars, but otherwise there's nothing that can really be done about it right now... assuming that is what you're talking about. If not correct me please.

Do we not already have a transparent Nintendo? If not you can easily easily find one.

In this case, the higher resolution box art was doctored poorly though. The image was completely washed out! The smaller resolution image, while a bit darker, had more color and was easier to see some detail.

Yea I have LaunchBox on an internal Sata 6GB/s connection and it's great with my OS on the SSD. At a certain point an SSD could help, but I am more willing to bet your CPU is the culprit. As long as LB is on an internal SATA 3GB/s or a 6GB/s connection you're going to be doing pretty good. LaunchBox can have a lot of images, but it's all cached. So if you have a giant library it will certainly drag down LaunchBox but based on your CPU. A while ago we figured out that the cut off before performance starts to take a hit was 8k in your LB Library.

m3TTwUrsT said still working on german translation, but went on vacation ;-) No worries! We appreciate the work.

Usually in those Tutorials I will put the suggested emulator first, and a secondary option for people second. I will also generally say which emulator I suggest users to use. That tutorial was pretty meaty and lengthy as was so I didn't include a MAMEUI version. With LaunchBox for the most part regular MAME works fine if you don't want to change too many settings, and even then the menu's in MAME aren't horrible. RetroArch is our generally prefered and recommended emulator, but by no means is it the only one and in a few cases the stand alone emulator is suggested over the RA Core.

The dates are always wildly inaccurate for me in certain situations, so I'm not surprised.

Of course, no problem!

No that just removes images that aren't assigned to games anymore. In BigBox, Options > Image Cache. Conversly you can also delete the folder in your LaunchBox folder. No matter what you choose, your game images will need to be re-cached like when you added your games.

Ah yea, that makes sense. I searched last time looking for it and I couldn't find it. Like I said, I just don't think they have that implemented yet. I'll double check and look around again.

Yes I am telling you it is 100% clean and Bit Defender is completely wrong in this case. It is actually commonly wrong. As for the roms, you can use them in any location as long as you've specified that in MAME. If you launch a single game through LaunchBox to MAME it may not know where to look for the rest of the files it needs. So either you need to have the roms in the roms folder for MAME, your 173 split pack with no modifications, or you need to tell MAME where your roms or located if they are located outside of the roms folder.

I think this was asked before and I think we came to the conclusion that Cemu is just not ready for the general audience. Cemu is very much an early beta or even alpha product still, so they don't have proper settings or command lines or anything like that. The last time this was asked I checked and it was only a few weeks prior that they added games to be able to be launched through the command line as is... so they're just not ready yet. I also thank you for still supporting Nintendo. I think it's a bit tasteless when the console is affordable and readily available that people want to Emulate it so quickly without a purchase. Not to mention it's going to play better on a real Wii U for a long time coming.

It could be based on your screen resolution. If I recall Jason makes those video's with increased DPI, so there is technically less room for the video to be displayed. Regular DPI on a 16:9 screen must give the right space proportions to create the black bars. I know it's both playback engines, but it's because they both handle that stuff the same way. Play an old TV show on your monitor in VLC, WMP or even Kodi and without stretching the image it will create black bars.

Clear the cache, either by deleting it or refreshing the images with the option.

So then it's VLC or WMP displaying Black Bars because of the space it has. I think there needs to be a way, on the code side, for Jason to detect 4:3 and 16:9 video and the video plays accordingly. I think the playback engine is assuming what is available and trying to display the video in that size. If a 4:3 video gets played in a 16:9 aspect ratio then you get black bars. If you display a 16:9 video in a 4:3 window you get black bars but on the top and bottom. There needs to be a detection method I think where the player gets sized to the size of the video, and scaled up (within ratio) if needed to fill the space.

Yea you either need to tell MAME the proper location or put them in their roms folder. As for BitDefender, this is saddly a common problem with them, and they are completely wrong obviously. This is what's called a false positive. Add your LaunchBox directory to the Whitelist feature of BitDefender, add the setup as well, or get a new AV solution.

Yea ROM's can be a bit of a grey area, at least some of them (Nintendo published games, especially ones they still sell, are not really a grey area), but BIOS certainly are not.

Different settings, larger libraries, you'd be surprised how different results can be after 1 setting change.

Whoa, ok I get choppiness in the new view, but nothing like this in the view that we've had since BigBox was created. We have similar PC's too. I have an i7 6700, 32GB of DDR4 and a GTX 970. Try turning off or changing the animations. Options -> Game Images, at the bottom of that list.