Topic: Emulation ... (Read 299 times)

gibletto · « **Reply #15 on:** June 29, 2006, 06:31:00 AM »

QUOTE(phrozenice @ Jun 29 2006, 01:36 PM)

ps. I've never posted before, usually just read, but this thread caught my eye. I'd almost given up on x-s after reading 60 pages of flames and lots of capital letters, but this topic is interesting.

ph²

Holy crap are you me?!

Yes this thead is interesting and when it came to xbox hacking, I thought this would be an avenue of thought, but never so quickly!

the joker · « **Reply #16 on:** June 29, 2006, 07:18:00 AM »

I've also programmed over 10 years on "odd" systems, what I've learned is that making a cpu opcode-compatible aint that uncommon...or hard. Keep in mind that the size of the emulator is incredibly small, so I doubt that it actually emulates the cpu itself. That would not only take a huge program to do - but incredible amount of cpu power.
However, if the cpu already understood x86 code - which aint that hard to do - all it would take is a driver to suit the system better.

I can't find it in me that they made a x86 emu for ppc in a few houndred k size, when the disasm from the 360 looks exactly like any normal x86 disasm.

gonkle · « **Reply #17 on:** June 29, 2006, 07:25:00 AM »

mmh, how much code in the hombrew apps are directX calls and how much are CPU/Plattform related? i dont know how the emulation there works, but couldnt the emulation here more work by recompiling the main GAme(xbe) on the new plattform in a compatibilty mode or something, since IBM designed the CPU for M$ wishes and maybe they have some sort of x86 compatible opcodes.

the joker · « **Reply #18 on:** June 29, 2006, 07:42:00 AM »

QUOTE(gonkle @ Jun 29 2006, 03:32 PM)

mmh, how much code in the hombrew apps are directX calls and how much are CPU/Plattform related?

very little is cpu/platform related. it's mostly all directX - making it real simple to work with.

BiohazrD · « **Reply #19 on:** June 29, 2006, 08:53:00 AM »

QUOTE(phrozenice @ Jun 29 2006, 08:58 AM)

Knowing M$, the project team was told "hey, you guys work on that backward compatibility thing for the older games", and they didn't consult the guys working on the 360 core. Which is typical M$ behaviour.

MICRO$$$UCK.

Seriously, using the $ is so annoying. They are a corporation, their aim is to make money. SUPRISE!

Also, you know what typical MS behavior is? Really? Because look at every Windows OS, and you can see that MS is anal retentive about planning and executing backwards compatability. What you say would be atypical MS behavior.

Lord Serebi · « **Reply #20 on:** June 30, 2006, 08:49:00 AM »

I keep trying to think of a good example of loading an emulator through an emulator and having access to all the physical system's resources

does Dos Windows work on Dosxbox? i dont kno if thats a good example... i really do have something PC in mind, but dont remember where I ran it... it was a pointless roundabout method that worked.

ryan_the_leach · « **Reply #21 on:** July 02, 2006, 06:53:00 AM »

Games seem to stress the xbox 1 out more then apps ever did, so it'd be almost easyier for it to emulate right?

WildMonkeys · « **Reply #22 on:** July 02, 2006, 04:40:00 PM »

I didn't really read the rest of the thread (other than the first page - sorry

), but wouldn't you need to create a brand new set of variables for the emulator? (as it can only for for specific games) Unless you're talking about creating a new game on top of another engine existingly-emulated?

yaazz · « **Reply #23 on:** July 02, 2006, 06:27:00 PM »

for an interesting theory on how this may be acomplished, remember that all the native directX calls would definitley be emulated, now take a program like fuckMS that allowed you to play on xbox live with games on your hard drive through a simple Asm jmp call, now make this jmp call point to avalaunch, which would be using directX code that is already emulated....

krazyshane · « **Reply #24 on:** July 03, 2006, 01:11:00 PM »

Yea, but what about the fact that some xbox games are improved on the 360? I mean, some games have better AA, are upscaled, and have better framerates.

If it was straight emulation, and there was no access to additional resources, all this would not be possible... correct?

Shane

the joker · « **Reply #25 on:** July 05, 2006, 05:37:00 AM »

QUOTE(ieatrox @ Jul 4 2006, 12:48 AM)

...

Interesting point of view. It would explain a lot if its something like that.

MrBond · « **Reply #26 on:** July 13, 2006, 01:12:00 PM »

Hmm...I'm not sure, but I think you're asking if someone can supply you with some proper grammar conventions? That must be it...it's hard to tell with the lack of punctuation.

Sorry to sound rude, but people really should learn proper english before being allowed anywhere near a keyboard.

ieatrox: I understand most of what you're saying, and the theory seems sound...but what would the purpose of the third core be? You said it could most likely be used to execute native PPC code, but in backwards compatibility, I wouldn't think that there would be any to execute. Do you mean it would be set aside to handle the core PPC functions of the host 360 OS, such as the guide blade (At least, the one that pops up telling you that the guide cannot be run in BC mode). This seems to make more sense to me, especially after seeing the ability to use custom soundtracks (although by a glitch, I'm sure), in Halo 2, and other BC games.

Author Topic: Emulation ... (Read 299 times)