I was changing the wrong parts of each table entry when I was making those screenshots.

That's with sound disabled. It's 2 or 3 fps with sound enabled. Yeah, my machine sucks that much. See why I keep pulling for a faster bSnes? I know it's possible with no accuracy lost.

Those screenshots and a few others were the trial and error. Dragonsbrethren managed to break the gradiant for more than I did a couple of times.

It looked as though we would go the entire night without figuring out what to do. Then our unofficial programmer appeared and stepped in. After more tests, it was finally fixed. I'll tell you one thing, I've seen enough 5's and 6's to last me an entire week. =\\

And the documentation never once mentioned how flexible the tables can be. I was asking a general question because I thought the tables followed some generic format (which again isn't pointed out). Do you see why I was so frustrated now?

I'll be posting a screenshot of the fixed screen when the rest of the stuff with it gets fixed. Fortunately, I already know how to do that. :laugh:

I still don't understand how some of the table formats work. I agree that the documents don't cover all the different formats. What I did was look at a table in a game that I wanted to replicate and use that formats. You will see that there are different ways to do the same thing. In the case where you could use an autoincrement you could also use a standarad 4byte. That's why I stick with the four byte method, it gives you complete control of each scanline. When table size is not an issue it's the best option.

Unfortunately, yes. :'(

My system specs:

550MHz AMD Athlon (socket A I believe)
384 megs RAM (SD RAM probably)
64 meg PCI nVidia GeForce 3
OS: XP, against my wishes. I'd much rather use 2k but it has hardware conflicts with my machine.
DirectX 9.0c

There's probably something else, but the machine is general crap by today's standards. It gets done what I need though. Not like I can afford to upgrade anything in it anyway.

It ran that fast even when I was using 2k. I don't run any resource hogs either.

It starts out at about 32 fps, but then when the game actually gets going is when it drops. So yeah, any chance of a faster version? :'(

--Edit--
There is one thing I forgot to point out. Everytime I've been running bSnes is with no frameskip, and it on normal speed. I've tested some frameskipping and it seems to top out at setting 6 and does no better any higher. It does run really choppy though. Enabling the sound makes the whole thing crawl at a grand 6 fps (with frameskip!).

While on the subject of frameskip, I have a suggestion for something to add. A slowdown button. While kinda pointless, it's the exact same thing as frameskip, more or less.