Print

[Zero]

Yup, Xport already said himself he would not be making an Snes port so this poll is kind of pointless.

[Likklebaer]

As far as I'm concerned, lantus has already given us an excellent SNES emulator and I wouldn't personally see any point in another one.

SNES emu aside however, I think Xport should reconsider his (frankly rather silly) rule about not porting emulators that have already been ported in some form. It would be nice to have a choice as to which emu to use since many ppl have different opinions as to the quality of what we're currently using.
For example, it would be very interesting to see an Xport version of MAME. Would it be better than MAMEoX? perhaps and perhaps not, the fun of it is deciding for yourself. The other major example is the Amiga. Xport could be worried that a UAE port by him would be so much better as to cause the current author to drop his (probably already dropped) version. But surely it's having the best emulator possible that's the important thing, and UAE-X will never, ever be that.

So I guess it's a matter of opinion. If some ppl consider XSNES9X to be lacking in some way then I suppose wanting an Xport SNES emu is perfectly reasonable.

[lantus]

heres a hot tip for you guys...the linux port of zsnes uses SDL.....

[Zero]

Xport has worked on systems that the current ports were lacking such as Wonderswan and GBA.  I think his point in not wanting to do Snes is that Lantus port is already as good as anyone else would be able to get it.

[Dahak]

I abstain from voting. Xport ports what he wants to port.

[Iriez]

QUOTE (Herculezz @ Dec 7 2003, 12:42 PM)

So what's so wrong with there being multiple emu's for SNES? So back in the day when ZSNES was not evry good and SNES9X was the top EMU then it was pointless for ZSNES coders to continue? No

Theres a simple flaw in your logic, and anyone else who is making this argument.

The past was weekly updates of inefficient flawed emulators.

SNES is the closest console to be emulated perfectly these days. xSnes9x is so near perfect, why on *earth* would anyone consider competing with it? Sure, people might do it for a hobby, but its not going to meet the expectations that xSnes9x has already created.

I honestly cant believe what im reading. You have a 99.9% perfect emulator for your xbox, and you people are ACTUALLY making a poll begging xport to do another port?

Absolutly fucking-ridiculous

[Iriez]

QUOTE (Zero @ Dec 7 2003, 03:30 PM)

Xport has worked on systems that the current ports were lacking such as Wonderswan and GBA.  I think his point in not wanting to do Snes is that Lantus port is already as good as anyone else would be able to get it.

Indeed it was.

[Large Dopant white]

The days of coding your own emulator just for the hell of it has passed. That was back when emulation was something new and fresh. Like many things that become popular, everyone wants to give it a shot. Now, people  just want an emulator that progresses nicely (not necessarily fast) and has good compatability with some decent "candy" features like netplay. The general consensus definately agrees with the mindset that multiple groups may as well contribute to the same project rather than seperate ones, as compared to the now-unpopular mindset that competition is good. Many coders agree with this line of thought, and I, personally, also agree with it.
This isn't factoring in the situational specifics of this particular question, even. It is rendered more infeasable by the fact that ZSNES' core is in assembly, and while that wouldn't be too hard to port (both the PC and the XBox have the same processor core, the x86), it wouldn't be a walk in the park, either. With the speed that XSNES9X goes, getting a minor tweak from being coded in assembly versus C/C++ wouldn't even be noticable. In short, it's not worth the time that would be invested in it.

[WilliamDecker]

I can honestly say I'd love for some awesome netplay.  3 Player Secret of Mana? YES PLEASE!

Anyway...just to jump in here...I don't think anyone wants to touch the source for ZSNES quite simply because I don't think the amount of time it'll take to port and the actual PAYOUT won't be that great.  ZSNES does have good netplay, but is it worth the time it'll take to port?

Quite simply too hard for what it will be.

[Iriez]

QUOTE (Large Dopant white @ Dec 7 2003, 08:29 PM)

This isn't factoring in the situational specifics of this particular question, even. It is rendered more infeasable by the fact that ZSNES' core is in assembly, and while that wouldn't be too hard to port (both the PC and the XBox have the same processor core, the x86), it wouldn't be a walk in the park, either. With the speed that XSNES9X goes, getting a minor tweak from being coded in assembly versus C/C++ wouldn't even be noticable. In short, it's not worth the time that would be invested in it.

If anyone actually bothered to read what lantus said, you all would realize how easy it actually is.

But you guys do realize you can play ZSNES on xbox-linux yes? I heard it also plays fullspeed. Porting it, since its SDL, would not be a overly difficult thing to do, thanks to lantus's SDL lib.

[Zero]

QUOTE

Fifth, FYI, Snes9x is more reliant on "hacks" than Zsnes. Zsnes tries to reverse engineer the sucker to its orginal.

That is fading away now with each update.

[Zero]

QUOTE (DaSauce @ Dec 14 2003, 03:07 AM)

... and better if he can get the source for the best SNES product out there and place it in as core... Why the heck not?

Because he has said himself several times that he wont port an Snes emulator?

[Likklebaer]