This isn't tools being offered it is a description of how to do it yourself (tools will need to be adjusted to data). The code presented looks very clear with simple self explanatory basic calls made (mostly accessing, reading and writing files).

This code should work as is using Mono.

But the complaint was weird in the first place?

> This code should work as is using Mono.

Sure, this one does, but nearly any .NET program with a GUI won't. It's very frustrating to run into useful programs that I can't run, and most often applications that fit that description are written in a .NET language.

> But the complaint was weird in the first place?

Yeah, true. There's nothing hard about reading C#, just running it.

You make it sound as if there were no portable (or 'non-windows') C# applications. Stuff I care about:

http://banshee.fm/

https://wiki.gnome.org/Apps/Tomboy

http://f-spot.org/

http://keepass.info/

At least in the game-hacking-with-a-GUI space, there very nearly aren't any.

Wow, you're really narrowing this down now. OK, there aren't many tools in the portable C# game-hacking-with-a-GUI space. Why is that such a great issue, and why is it relevant to this article?

It's just annoying, as someone who likes to dabble in that space. There's a lot of good, interesting work done and it's frustrating that it's done using a proprietary technology I can't use when there are tons of other options.

This article is about game hacking using C# and never addressed the issue of portability, because game hackers who use C# never think about portability. That was my point.

Maybe it doesn't address the "issue" of portability because it in fact is a portable program. Maybe it doesn't address portability because it's an article about reverse engineering a game. Maybe it doesn't address portability because the code is meant to illustrate his process rather than for others to port it. I still don't see how your criticism is relevant at all.