Cheat Engine

[Felheart]

Hey DarkByte,
first I'd like to thank you for CE, it really is a awesome tool.

However, I have a few improvements to suggest:

1. Make the Pointerscanner windows remember it's position and size.

2. The width of the column "Points to:" should as well be saved, because in 90% of the cases the standard width is to narrow.

3. Make it also remember which display selection has been choosen (4b/float/double)

4. If one searches with "Pause the game while scanning" is enabled
CE will tell you "Please unpause the game first" when you try to "Next Scan"
And it's not possible to unpause the process (the button seems to be bugged)


And finally i have a few questions:

1. Is is possible that "improve pointer scan with heap data" might remove
some possible pointer trails? Or is is 100% safe to use?
Because in fear of missing some pointers I let it disabled for now.
Also, what reasons are there that the pointer scanner sometimes misses some pointer trails? Any options to help with that?

2. Why do I need select a pointer scan file myself?(instead of it creating a xyz.temp file)
And why has the manual save option been remove from the menu?

3. What could be possible resons why Hyper Scan fails sometimes?
("...not told me where to start scanning, never started blah blah...")
Is there someting I can do about that?

4. What options do I need to check on when hacking games in PCSX2 ?
The only thing I know about is that there can be huge offsets. (bc of emulated memory)
But are there any other CE related things to notice when hacking games inside an emulator? Is it ok to use Hyper Scan with PCSX2?


OS: Win7 x64 (with disabled driver signature enforcement)

[Dark Byte]

Thanks I'll look into that

as for the questions:
1: It will remove 'possible' pointer trails because it now knows the base location of the memory block, so doesn't have to look for pointers that point within it
Of course, those 'possible' pointer paths are often wrong, but in some cases they might be helpful for an in structure lookup. Just experiment.
Heap data allows for faster and deeper scans, and retain a very high rate of getting a workable pointer

as for missing a pointer trail:
Disable the option that says "Stop when a static path has been found"

2:
So you can make sure the folder it's saved in is actually writable,
and so you're not accidentally overwriting the scan result of another pointerscan you might have done previously.
E.g I might do a level 8 scan with heap and a level 5 scan without, but intend on using them both
Doing those scans after eachother saves time because it doesn't need to remap the whole pointer table

As for the manual save option gone:
There's nothing new to save anyhow, rescan will also let you save what you want
A save would just be the same as a filecopy with only the headerfile slightly adjusted

3: cpu hogged, target process paused/debugged, target process having no rights to write to the scanfolder, etc...

As to do about it: Make sure the folder is enabled, or better yet, don't use hyperscan

4: 1 byte value scans even for values higher than 1 byte
you might need to add mem_mapped to the memory regions to scan
don't use the pointerscan, and only do basic debugging to find the base address of the emulated system memory. From there do some calculations to get to the final offset (and do relative searches for values containing a relative address to what you need, and use those as offset locations)

[Felheart]