Post by: nemt on February 10, 2004, 08:23:00 AM
| QUOTE (XDelusion @ May 17 2003, 04:11 AM) |
| the bumber of people |
I do agree, though...it is shocking how people can figure out how to solder, but still ask these questions...
Post by: Iriez on February 29, 2004, 10:39:00 AM
| QUOTE (Swikcorp @ Feb 29 2004, 02:44 AM) |
| With my Holy Box i could handle a saturn emulator with ease and every rom for it a friend of mine also has one of my customized Holy Box's and he is on the verge of completing a DC emulator (at the moment there is just a few bugs with a few roms). Can't Stop! |
What on earth are you rambling about? I hope you are joking, and not seriously trying to pull a charade in here.
PS- DC doesnt use 'roms'.
Guess we can forget about Icarus guys, because Swikcorp's friend is almost finished with a complete DC emulator!
Post by: Iriez on March 01, 2004, 04:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (c0nc3pts @ Mar 1 2004, 12:11 AM) |
lol Iriez, yeah pretty funny how his friend is out doing a team of people that have been working on a emulator for what....a year+. Talented people out there indeed  |
Try 3-4 years.
Post by: Zyyke on March 03, 2004, 10:57:00 AM
Wouldn't buying/building a PC be easier and cheaper??? Not to mention that you could buy a used Dreamcast for like $10.00.
Swikcorps claim is just silly. If you really have something to show ... show us! If not, bug off.
I think maybe this thread needs some clean-up ... I volunteer my post for a donation to the ever-needing garbage bin!!
Post by: Iriez on March 04, 2004, 06:45:00 AM
However since the .1 chance remains that you are legit, i'll give you a chance to not talk about it on these forums, and to let the beta be out when its out.
I would also like to notate that the specs Zyyke mentioned are physically not possible on the xbox. Once the *entire* xbox is reversed, and everything traced in order to solder such a beast of hardware in (FX5900 ..AGP? Xbox doesnt have AGP guys.) it would be absolutly pointless.
Now, anymore talk of such nonsense will result in garbage bin, or further actions.
Post by: Iriez on April 07, 2004, 11:18:00 PM
Post by: QuimbyDogg on June 01, 2004, 12:53:00 PM
Post by: celestria on July 22, 2004, 11:22:00 PM
Post by: Aerok on July 24, 2004, 11:02:00 PM
Post by: Instinct[DA] on July 26, 2004, 01:14:00 AM
Post by: Iriez on July 30, 2004, 12:46:00 PM
| QUOTE (xV1510Nx @ Jul 30 2004, 03:41 AM) |
| omg, do u little n00b bastards ever learn. a million people have said an emulator for ps2 dreamcast or gamecube on xbox1 IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. So stop being iggnorant and fuck off. |
This is your first and last warning. It means "STFU"
(PS- Its 'Ignorant' ...might want to look up the meaning of it in the dictionary along with 'ironic')
Post by: Iriez on August 01, 2004, 11:48:00 PM
Which is important when understanding why new hardware is not emulated well or at all: documentation.
The GBA for example, came to light with alot of documentation behind it, and look at how well its emulated. The ps2 is much more complex, and all of its inner sekrat's are yet to be discovered =p
Post by: GoukiX on September 14, 2004, 07:55:00 PM
| QUOTE (Gilga @ Sep 1 2004, 09:54 PM) |
| Any chance of the xeon emulator being ported on the xbox? I really want to play emulated xbox games on my xbox   |
yeh i heard emulated xbox games are the shit... some noobs these days. They want there xbox to go get a drink from the fridge for them too
Post by: SNAAAKE on September 15, 2004, 05:02:00 AM
| QUOTE (GoukiX @ Sep 15 2004, 03:58 AM) |
| yeh i heard emulated xbox games are the shit... some noobs these days. They want there xbox to go get a drink from the fridge for them too |
Hah ! my xbox does bring me drinks from the fridge AND sometimes it makes pancakes for me
Post by: deathx88 on September 22, 2004, 08:31:00 PM
| QUOTE (MeghansUncle @ Sep 22 2004, 07:19 PM) |
| Those aren't pancakes dude....check the luggage |
they still taste good
Post by: VampX on October 18, 2004, 07:49:00 PM
| QUOTE (Gilga @ Sep 1 2004, 11:54 PM) |
| Any chance of the xeon emulator being ported on the xbox? I really want to play emulated xbox games on my xbox |
YEsS! with SuperEagle2XSai Filtering and Double Scanlines!!!
Post by: blueshogun96 on October 27, 2004, 02:15:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Any chance of the xeon emulator being ported on the xbox? I really want to play emulated xbox games on my xbox |
Why on earth would someone ask something so stupid? Why would SF waste his valuable time on something so pointless? Why would anyone want that in the first place?
Post by: deathx88 on October 28, 2004, 03:38:00 PM
| QUOTE (blueshogun96 @ Oct 27 2004, 10:18 PM) |
| Why on earth would someone ask something so stupid? Why would SF waste his valuable time on something so pointless? Why would anyone want that in the first place? |
if i remember what they tought me in school i'd say that he's joking
Post by: HomieJK1 on October 29, 2004, 12:14:00 PM
Post by: spiderchip12321 on December 17, 2004, 03:50:00 PM
| QUOTE (lucas @ May 17 2003, 10:17 AM) |
| but what if i nail roadkill to my xbox and wear an onion on my belt? then could i emulate xbox2 on my xbox? |
lay off the pot man
Post by: danja69 on December 22, 2004, 01:43:00 AM
Post by: Mr.INSANE on December 23, 2004, 09:58:00 PM
QUOTE(danja69 @ Dec 22 2004, 10:14 AM)
If they could make a program to convert software from one platform to another, be it Xbox to PS2 or Windows to Mac or anything else for that matter it would have been done decades ago. The market for such a program is MASSIVE, its the entire software industry massive. If it could be done then every platform would have every product released simultaneously. There would be no need for emulation or manual porting of software.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: edudlive on January 09, 2005, 08:10:00 PM
-
Post by: edudlive on January 09, 2005, 08:10:00 PM
QUOTE(Mr.INSANE @ Dec 24 2004, 07:29 AM)
yes this is a good idea but the creators dont like it and good gmes usally get ported anyways plus its exciting to be emulating a system lol but this is possible especially considering the xbox has higher spces than the ps2
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Reanimation_LP on February 27, 2005, 04:29:00 AM
-
Dont get me started on the PS2 either.
The Gamecube is even funnier, as that actually has a Dirty G4 (a G3 with some Altivec), and 40 MB of RAM, plus then a ATI RADEON processor.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on March 11, 2005, 11:07:00 AM
-
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: tampabayfan on April 21, 2005, 07:35:00 PM
-
Dreamcast emulation is very possible. PS2 and Gamecube emulation is not. The best chances for a dreamcast emulator or possibly a PS2 emulator is having the 128mb ram upgrade. I believe the Dreamcast emulator will happen though.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: c0ncept on May 08, 2005, 12:11:00 PM
-
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Joebob420 on May 08, 2005, 09:34:00 PM
-
Back to console to console emulation ive played many a psx game on my dc u can burn it with this program to allow it to boot on a DC or buy theese disk that allow certin psx games to play on the DC i know its true as ive done it. The dc also emulates snes perfectly but you knew that all ready. And if specs matter so much the xbox should't have a problem emulating dc games and the specs wont lie xbox is atleast 3 to 1 stronger than the dc. Just my 2 cents ttyl.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: c0ncept on May 11, 2005, 07:01:00 AM
-
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: EGOvoruhk on May 23, 2005, 09:30:00 PM
-
It was an emulator, it was just designed to emulate certain games
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: blade0440 on September 17, 2005, 05:49:00 PM
-
We are in the year 2005 by now there should be a ps2 emulator on the xbox...their just should be...
If anyone has done it or knows what website the guide is on or somethin like that...please reply im dying to get a emulator for a ps2 on the xbox
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: The Noob on September 19, 2005, 01:43:00 AM
-
Somebody grab the pitchforks and I'll light the torches.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: aaronspybrook on October 10, 2005, 08:58:00 PM
-
Post by: Reanimation_LP on February 27, 2005, 04:29:00 AM
Dont get me started on the PS2 either.
The Gamecube is even funnier, as that actually has a Dirty G4 (a G3 with some Altivec), and 40 MB of RAM, plus then a ATI RADEON processor.
Post by: deusprogrammer on March 11, 2005, 11:07:00 AM
Post by: tampabayfan on April 21, 2005, 07:35:00 PM
Post by: c0ncept on May 08, 2005, 12:11:00 PM
Post by: Joebob420 on May 08, 2005, 09:34:00 PM
Back to console to console emulation ive played many a psx game on my dc u can burn it with this program to allow it to boot on a DC or buy theese disk that allow certin psx games to play on the DC i know its true as ive done it. The dc also emulates snes perfectly but you knew that all ready. And if specs matter so much the xbox should't have a problem emulating dc games and the specs wont lie xbox is atleast 3 to 1 stronger than the dc. Just my 2 cents ttyl.
Post by: c0ncept on May 11, 2005, 07:01:00 AM
Post by: EGOvoruhk on May 23, 2005, 09:30:00 PM
Post by: blade0440 on September 17, 2005, 05:49:00 PM
If anyone has done it or knows what website the guide is on or somethin like that...please reply im dying to get a emulator for a ps2 on the xbox
Post by: The Noob on September 19, 2005, 01:43:00 AM
Post by: aaronspybrook on October 10, 2005, 08:58:00 PM
QUOTE(lucas @ May 17 2003, 05:25 AM)
but what if i nail roadkill to my xbox and wear an onion on my belt? then could i emulate xbox2 on my xbox?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: modT on February 19, 2006, 06:22:00 PM
-
where do i find the games for the emulators
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: awal on February 19, 2006, 09:48:00 PM
-
Here
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 16, 2003, 11:01:00 PM
-
I am by no means an expert on the subject but I know how emulation works. I wanted to write this as a topic that could be pinned for newcomers to read before they start asking for PS2, Gamecube, and DC emulators.
Every system has it's own unique and different hardware. And each system has it's own individual coding methods and SDKs. So obviously you can't just play a PS2 game on the XBox and so on. Because the coding is different and written for a different set of hardware.
What an emulator does is recreates the specific hardware for another system with software. And then that software runs on the hardware of the host system. So just imagine for a second. Two systems that are just about on par with each other as far as speed goes. The only way to get full speed would be to have the true hardware for the system. Software could never hope to emulate a system that is close to the same speed as the host hardware. For a good example, think of hardware rendering vs software rendering...which is faster? The hardware of course.
Another way to think of it is when you put a game in your PS2, the game just runs right off the hardware. If you were trying to emulate it on the XBox, first it would go into the software and have it's code and commands changed to the native language of the XBox, and then that new code would be run. And being that the systems are so closely matched in speed, the emulation would be very, very, very unplayably slow. And the problem with PS2 emulation is there really isn't even a working one for the PC yet.
Now why can older systems be emulated? Because compared to a PS2, their hardware is very simple to manage with an emulator. The XBox can manage the code fast enough to keep the game going at a steady clip. I know this isn't an in depth explanation, but I thought I would put it in laymen's terms.
Basically...here is the gist of what I just said...PS2, Dreamcast, and especially Gamecube emulation is not going to happen on the XBox. It just can't handle it. Granted one could be made, but it would be so slow and ugly it wouldn't even be worth the effort.
Anyways...case closed...after reading this there should be no reason for anyone to ask questions about why PS2 emulation can't be done.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 17, 2003, 12:03:00 AM
-
Thank you whoever pinned this. I am honored
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: XDelusion on May 17, 2003, 12:47:00 AM
-
It is really shocking the bumber of people who's problem solving skills are good enough to set up a modded XBOX, or even mod it themselves, but can't understand why you will NEVER see Gamecube let alone Dreamcast on the XBOX.
You have the speed ton consider, and the RAM, the RAM being the harder to explain.
Also, many people believe that if the N64 can be emulated, then the Dreamcast should be emulatable as well, what they fail to understand is that the Dreamcast is FAR more advanced than the N64, I guess you would have to own one and play the better titles that came out for it to see. Give the Dreamcast a DVD ROM for extra storage space, and it could easily compete with a PS2 any day!
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: lucas on May 17, 2003, 02:50:00 AM
-
but what if i nail roadkill to my xbox and wear an onion on my belt? then could i emulate xbox2 on my xbox?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 17, 2003, 03:23:00 AM
-
Yep, the total internal memory for a dc comes to ~35MB alone (this is what my savestates come to anyhow uncompressed), and then there is a lot more ram required for the program itself, aswell processing ram, cached texture storage,etc... and a half-decent dynarec alone would want a lot more megabytes too.
Its just not feasible.
Nevertheless the fact that on ~2ghz systems we get 10-15fps only
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: rhawk79 on May 17, 2003, 11:57:00 AM
-
Is XBOX2 going to be able to run XBOX1 games (& software) ?? If so, that's the only way I can picture a PS2, DC or Gamecube emulator being worth the effort. Working on them now knowing that they'll eventually run on an XBOX2.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Lowen Na on May 17, 2003, 12:07:00 PM
-
Hello, McFly! Anybody Home?!?!?
The are being worked on FOR THE PC. Once a PS2 or DC emulator is working well on the PC then someone might start to work on porting to an other system that might stand a chance of running it.
In the mean while, there is not point to porting emulators that don't work well to a hardware platform than can't run it.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: SSSSSmokey on May 17, 2003, 01:51:00 PM
-
*Smacks rhawk79*
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: rhawk79 on May 17, 2003, 03:52:00 PM
-
yea that's true, for a port, obviously there are no working pc emulators so there's nothing to port in the first place. i was saying that in case anybody is trying to build one for the xbox from the ground up.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: dmb062082 on May 17, 2003, 06:58:00 PM
-
dont ever reply to any of my quotes telling me I act like a child.
As for the topic at hand yes you pretty much hit the nail on the head. Its never going to happen on our xbox's anyway. Or most of your PC'S for that matter. And thats even if a ps2 or DC emu even existed. Possibly if the xbox 2 (or any other next generation system) is hackable it just could happen. But I would imagine you will need a PC at least 2x more powerfull than the current console you are trying to emulate to enjoy it.
As for emulating a n64 saturn psx or a 3d0 pcfx (last generation systems) that however is possible (Though there are a few emulators on my list not currently emulated) as they are older and obsolete compared to the power of our pesonal computers and now xbox's!
Just had to throw my 2 cents in, adiods.
This post has been edited by dmb062082: May 18 2003, 02:01 AM
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 18, 2003, 12:04:00 AM
-
Saturn is tough but girigiri has shown it potentially possible. However Saturn gfx has to be cpu rendered so the celeron 733mhz would struggle even with that - unlike n64 where the dlists/alists can be hle'd saving a *lot* of cpu resources, and putting the xbox's powerful gfx card to use :)
Once Satourne has a good dynarec then we'll see.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Lowen Na on May 18, 2003, 05:15:00 PM
-
I am sure that this is real likely to happen.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: HeLiuM on May 19, 2003, 06:22:00 PM
-
thats 10-15 fps for a highly unoptimized engine. eventually im sure we could get a near full speed emu on say a 2.6ghz comp
that should definately be the other way around
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 20, 2003, 12:43:00 AM
-
Certainly on some games we are aiming for ~2ghz, but a celeron 733 is still out of the question =)
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: BenzineX on May 20, 2003, 12:42:00 AM
-
just have to say well said deusprogrammer
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: XDelusion on May 20, 2003, 03:42:00 PM
-
Lucas: I think your onto something there. I sincerely hope that the X2 features a place for your road kill, that would no doubt be a good marketing ploy.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 22, 2003, 10:18:00 PM
-
Dynamic recompilation is exactly the same as a standard interpreter emu except when emulating the cpu which is often the bottleneck in emulating nex-gen systems. Thus instead of continuously fetching and executing the asm instructions one by one, it just fetches them in blocks (up to jmp/bra instructions) compiles them to native x86 blocks and then each time that same block gets hit, they just executed the compiled x86 block.
There is HLE which can mean a variety of things ranging from intercepting display lists and just high-level processing them and sending them direct to a 3d gfx card, and also function-level hle which detects pre-known library functions and replaces them with pre-written fast code.
I don't have time to go into any more detail though
These two techniques are what have been used in all n64 emus.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 22, 2003, 11:47:00 PM
-
Even if this did work the way you are describing it, most processor instructions do not have an exact equivalent function on another processor. You'll need to execute another 2-8 or so instructions on the host processor just to perform the same function as the emulated processor. Even if you wrote an emulator that was as fast as it could possibly be (e.g. code fully optimized to the teeth), you still won't get full speed on a different-yet-equivalent host processor.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Hodr on May 25, 2003, 11:25:00 AM
-
CyRUS64- I was using the wrong term when I said "Dynamic" Recompilation, which you so nicely pointed out as meaning recompiled on the fly (hence the Dynamic I suppose, instead of static), but that doesn't mean the rest of what I said was invalid. I havn't messed with any 64 emulators since the first came out, but I dont think I remember hearing about any that actually recompile the entire rom before executing so that it would not have to waste cycles doing it while executing. There are speed increases to be had through this method because of the differences in hardware (for instance, in your 64 emulators your running code that has been optimised to run on 64 hardware so it was not written to take advantage of a prosessor that can do out-of-order execution or perhaps they waste cycles doing bit manipulation that isn't necessary on the new cpu etc.)
And to AlphaWolf- As I mentioned before, barring things like differences in register sizes or entire missing functions (like the inability to do integer addition or something) most processors have the same basic functions. And even if it does take 2-8 instructions to perform the equivalent some of them, that doesn't mean it will be slower/faster. Thats like saying RISC cpu's are always slower than CISC because they require more instructions to get something done (BTW, most will say RISK are faster....). But your forgetting that it may also be the case that something that takes 2-8 instructions on the emulated cpu can be done in 1 on the intel cpu. Besides which, any wildely different low level instructions are probably only going to deal with memory subsystems and calls to the graphic rendering devices, all of which are going to be replaced by different calls that do not perform the exact same function, as the hardware is different.
I didn't say it was easy, or that it would be pretty, all I said was that it is possible. I had to do something similar years ago in school. I was tasked to write a virtual machine that would execute Sparc assembly on an x86 system. I did that, but I also wrote a line by line interpreter that converted the assembly so that it could be compiled and run natively (which re-used about 90% of the code from the vm). Can you guess which one worked better? Even ignoring the time spent to interpret the code in the VM, the compiled version was still faster because the native x86 compiler was able to optimize the code (instead of just running it as it came like the vm) for that platform, which had different strengths and weaknesses.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: ector on May 25, 2003, 01:24:00 PM
-
The N64 emulator Corn does static recompilation, and is the fastest of them all. But in doing this, it also sacrifices compatibility (it only runs Mario64 and a few others AFAIK). Selfmodifying code and many other things are very problematic.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 25, 2003, 03:22:00 PM
-
General purpose processors, maybe, but application specific processors are a whole other ballgame, and you are going to have to deal with that if you want to emulate these consoles.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: jp110099 on May 25, 2003, 03:25:00 PM
-
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 26, 2003, 08:06:00 AM
-
I am talking about all of the above. Odds are not even one of these is going to be similar enough to the emulated system to get even close to 1:1 emulation. Graphics chips especialy, these always differ a hell of a lot. Even general purpose processors are a big maybe.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 09:12:00 AM
-
I have the src to an n64 'emu' that tries to preconvert n64 games to a x86-runnable .exe. However something like Zelda comes out to be ~500+MB and doesn't work much
As Ector says you just can't do it that way. You're having to predictively try and trace through all the possible routes through the code and its just not really very feasible for nex-gen consoles.
Even if you could do all this 'mapping' you still need to simulate the central cpus and that takes time
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 09:31:00 AM
-
Uh, you don't know much about the PS2 do you? In theory it is easier to write an xbox emulator on the ps2. There is one major bottleneck you run in to when emulating the PS2 on any DX8-based arch, you CANNOT use hardware to do vector unit emulation. The issue there is the fact that DX8 has a very limited vertex and pixel shader languages, which causes many things which can easily be done in the vector units impossible to do in the gpu on the xbox.
There are 4 COMPLETE processors (R5900, IOP, VU0, VU1) running in the ps2, to emulate all four on a 733Mhz system, isn't possible. There aren't enough cycles to makeup for the fact that it has smaller GPRs, and that it has to emulate 3 different ISA. I could continue about other reasons the xbox itself isn't powerful enough, but those reasons alone are enough if you know anything about hardware. (The R5900 has 32 128-bit GPRs which are being used nearly all the time.)
Don't just speculate, do some hard research before you try to compare specs, since the specs alone are useless.
Xbox2 might be able to emulate it, depending on the specs and amount of ram. But anyone who honestly thinks there is going to be a ps2 emulator for xbox, needs to learn about hardware.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 10:47:00 AM
-
(and thats with interpreter and not dynarec - and the demo ran at ~6-7 fps on my p3-850!)
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 26, 2003, 01:39:00 PM
-
Hmm...I don't know much about DC, but what if you HLE'd the entire thing?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 02:15:00 PM
-
What do you want to hle?
The graphics display lists are already hle'd, since lowlevel emulating the pvr chip would be both damn hard and damn slow. Other than that the seperate chips on the dreamcast are 'hle'd' too such as maple bus (for controllers), gdrom controller, rom board controller, sh4 modules, system asic etc and even the arm has a IcFakeARM mode.
But even so the SH4 does most of the work, and even with a v.good dynarec it takes a lot of processor power to emulate. All you can do with the code running on that is manually add 'hle functions' for the various library functions, but that takes a lot of time and won't help speed that drastically relative to dynarec.
The reason N64 is so hle'able is because it has co-processors, the rdp and rsp, that do a lot of work, and all emus merely high-level emulate them for the speed benefits - the R4300 still has to be essentially emulated though, but then its a much lesser processor than a sh4. The rdp can be hle'd since there are very few different microprograms that are loaded onto them since Nintendo didn't give out the docs to most companies. Technically the same could be feasible for the PS2 - the vector co-processors and IOP (ps1 chip) could be fully hle'd and only the central processor need be emulated but the problem is that all companies design their own programs to run on the vector copros so there'd be far too many different microprogs to reverse and emulate, but I guess they may end up doing this for certain games.
Gamecube and x-box also will have limited hle since the central processor does nearly all of the work, and the gpu can only really be hle'd. (However of course x-box uses such a mappable api that the cxbx project could easily produce an 'emulator' that should run faster than ps2, gc, or dc emus - all the api functions would be intercepted so the emulation of the central cpu doesn't really do that much work - you could try this for the dc api too, say, but then it'd take ages and be very non-compatible since katana, at least, is just not really easily mappable)
-CyRUS
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 03:12:00 PM
-
Uh to HLE the vector units on the ps2 is silly.
A game can be using the vector units for graphics one moment, and the next for just straight math.
Or vu0 is acting as a co-processor while vu1 is doing graphics.
So it'd have to be game specific.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 03:58:00 PM
-
I didn't claim to have a greater knowledge than Cyrus64- I have seen his dreamcast page and am sure he knows much more in depth information about the specific methods currently in use.
And I didn't say the graphics ruitines could be directly mapped. I claimed they could be replaced by roughly equivalent functions (i.e. if one system does gouraud shading and the other does flat shading, you make do with what you have). This obviously doesn't give a 100% emulation, but could in theory produce something usable.
But as I stated every time so far, I don't believe its likely to be done (and as Cyrus pointed out, attempts thus far for other systems have been failures).
And as far as the vertex shaders go, I can't really argue because your assumption that I don't know the specific hardware is correct.
I have decided, as sort of a proof of concept to see if I can find a suitable system to emulate on the Franklin eBookman (Which I am familiar with) which utilizes the SNK32 processor (http://download.fran...snk32_main.html). Yes, I know it won't prove anything about the specific setup we have been discussing (the big difference being the specialized graphic hardware) etc. but it might at least prove that the theory is valid.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 04:07:00 PM
-
Ohh, and before mage jumps all over me about the specific PS2 via Xbox argument, I was following someone elses premise of the two systems being roughly equal in power, which at least to me meant that the combined ability of those vector units etc. would not be greater than that of the xbox cpu / gpu. And, its cool that you know about the differences in the general purpose registers and that the ps2 has three instruction set architectures, but if you actually read any of my posts you would have remembered that I never claimed it could "emulate" any of those instruction sets, my whole premise was that "pre-compiling" for the xbox would eliminate the need to do so.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 04:27:00 PM
-
Even if you were to use said "pre-compiling", the xbox won't have enough Mhz to execute all the units at the same time, at near proper speeds. Many cycles are going to be wasted on the fact that the Intel processor doesn't have enough registers, or the fact that they're too small.
On top of that, writing such a pre-compiler is going to be quite a feat anyways. Dealing with code branches that can only be determined at run-time are going to cause major problems.
But sure anything can be done in theory, but theory is just that theory. In theory a person can write an autonomous piece of software that can design other software, however the reality of that happening anytime soon is nil. If it isn't useful in reality, then what's the point?
In the end I'd call it an empty pipedream.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 10:37:00 PM
-
Yes, the problems with parallel execution and differences in register type / quantity could be insurmountable (I actually stated in my original post that differences in registers would be a major pitfall. I mentioned size but quantity is as big / bigger problem).
On those grounds I would have to agree with you that a full speed emulation would be next to impossible.
The branching I dont see being as much of a problem. I would imaging no matter how or where it branches, its going to go to another piece of code that has been translated (but it could not exactly be automadic as the new ruitine may start befor or after where the previous location was). Barring self modifying code, which your not likely to see on an optical medium, this would be a small problem in comparison to the other problems that would already have to be overcome to get this far.
In any case, its all moot considering no one is likely to go so far as to write a disassembler comprehensive enough to support what I suggested anyways.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 27, 2003, 04:42:00 AM
-
You just couldn't precompile these binaries.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 27, 2003, 09:07:00 AM
-
What would an optical medium have to do with anything?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 27, 2003, 12:52:00 PM
-
I think what it all boils down to is this...all these n00bs out there just want too much for free. They want to buy a system that they can play everything on. I even think the Playstation Emulator is going a bit far. When it comes down to it emulation should be used for ancient systems we can no longer buy or find games for. And MAME emulation is good because we will never find all these arcade games at any arcade, and most of us certainly couldn't afford to have or even house all of these monstrousities. So for anything pre-Playstation I can understand, beyond this...most of us above the age of 16 have jobs and the resources to actually go out and buy these systems. The only people who whine and bitch about not having a PS2 are children. For those who are truly n00bs, either go buy the systems you want, or beg your parents for them. But understand you will never be given anything free in life.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: xionanx on May 28, 2003, 12:31:00 AM
-
Not to piss in your cornflakes, but last months Scientific American had a little blurb about a new device that was recently invented that has the ablility to autonomously invent anything else. Just enter what you want, hit the go button, and give it some time and it will spit out something that fits your needs. There go all those invention grants
Anyway, there are already PS2 games being run near perfect on the XBOX. MGS2 is an example, however it does have some slighte slow down compared to its PS2 counterpart, which I never noticed any slowdown playing. The idea of completely decompiling a game then recompiling it to run on the XBOX has merit. Most of us have upgraded our HD's, so I personally can imagine a program that could be run once to completelely copy a PS2 game to the XBOX HD, decompile it, then recompile it to run on the XBOX. It would take hours/days for the initial run to de/recompile, and then will most likely still require some emulated assistance to run PS2 code that doesn't direclty translate, but it is feasible.
Technically that wouldn't be a true "emulator" though. Plus i'm sure it would require extensive knowledge of both systems. Or am I just crazy?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 28, 2003, 09:10:00 AM
-
Heres the simplest way that this could be explained to you. Lets say that I wrote a program that just displays "hello world" in C. Now the way C is meant to be (read that, meant, not necessarily is), I can compile that program into machine language on the platform of my choosing. In doing this, it runs at faster speeds because its in the machines native language rather than having the machine translate tons of psuedocode on the fly. Now, lets say I compiled this hello world program for the powerpc platform, it would be then be basicaly rewritten into the powerpc assembly language, which is a lot more difficult to understand than C. Lets say that I wanted to now run this program on the x86 platform, all I have to do is take my source code, and recompile it for the X86 platform, that way I end up with a binary coded in x86 assembly language. Now lets say that I lost the source code for some reason, but I absolutely must run this program that I compiled for the powerpc platform on x86. I have two possible approaches, one approach would be to take the assembly code, and translate it to x86 by hand. The problem with this is assembly language is EXTREMELY difficult to work with, even with a simple hello world program, thats why most people write programs in a higher level language, and wouldn't dare think about translating a game to another machine language without the source code. Another way is that I could use an emulator to emulate the PPC platform, and we all know where that leads us.
Now source code is something highly coveted in the electronics industry, with a programs source code, you can do practicaly anything with it with very relative ease, including porting it from one platform to another without having to emulate it. The problem is that source code being as coveted as it is, you are probably never going to be able to get ahold of the code for "your favorite game here" within your lifetime.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mage on May 28, 2003, 11:15:00 AM
-
Maybe you should read the articles.
Anyways whatever the article was, it isn't as you say.
Such an invention is a holy-grail of AI, and would be published everywhere.
I recieved nothing regarding it, and I deal with AI often.
Even if it is a basic Expert system on physical designs using a hybrid learning system, that still wouldn't be able to design programs. So it isn't the same thing.
If decompiling and then recompiling a program to another system was so easy, everyone would have done that already. I can tell you don't ever decompile programs or you wouldn't have said such an idea.
Before anyone chimes in about doing it with MIPS-I or 32-bit sparc ISA, we're talking about modern ISA, not easy to deal with ones. There would be MANY issues that in the end make emulating easier. To be able to convert, you need to know how to emulate, so why not just write an emulator instead?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 05:06:00 PM
-
Why doesn't anyone listen to me? It's not a question of can we, it's a question of should we. And the answer to both questions is no. Some things were meant to be emulated, some aren't. Systems who's consoles and games are still last generation and current generation just shouldn't be emulated. Some people are just too greedy! We should concentrate on making the emulators we have better, rather than trying to build something impossible, and yes, immoral. I'm sure I will get flamed for using the word immoral in a place where we are already doing things of questionable legality.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 28, 2003, 05:19:00 PM
-
If somebody wants to write an emulator for a nextgen system, why shouldn't they? If you don't like it, don't use it, simple as that.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 07:28:00 PM
-
Why? Because we don't need a PS2 emulator yet. Most of us own a PS2, why would anyone want to play PS2 on their computer? I partially see your point though. It will be good to have one that works when we need it...but I don't think we are going to need it for another decade. I believe that making an emulator for something that you can easily aquire and use is just lazy and greedy. More power to the people who want to make the emulator...but why does everyone want one so bad? Go buy a damned PS2 if you want to play it so bad! Can't we just be happy with everything our XBox can do now? That is my point.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 10:18:00 PM
-
Coding the emulator...isn't lazy. But wanting an emulator now that will play PS2 games on the XBox is lazy and greedy. And the whole thing about having a PS2 that died is just an excuse. Stuff breaks, that doesn't entitle you to get it for free. All I am saying is that emulation should be for vintage gaming, not current generation gaming. Doesn't anyone else share my opinion?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: xionanx on May 29, 2003, 01:02:00 AM
-
I never said it would be easy, thats why I said that it would probably require extensive knowledge of both systems, and possibly hours/days for the program to decompile then recompile the code.
So, it is feasible, just highly unlikely.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 29, 2003, 02:44:00 PM
-
I think we just have a misunderstanding here Mage. I was referring to emulation of the PS2 on the XBox. I'm sorry if I made you angry or anything. I do agree that it is retarded to have to own all three systems just to play the games we want...but unfortunately that is how competition works. I think Sega got the right idea. Hopefully Nintendo will follow suite...but somehow I don't see MS and Sony...the Titans of the electronics industry bowing out. I think it's a rule of video gaming that there will always be atleast 2 systems on the market, which I think is stupid, seeing as most console manufacturers actually lose money on the systems themselves, but make tons of money on the software. I guess the royalties the software companies pay the console manu make it worth it.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: xionanx on May 29, 2003, 09:42:00 PM
-
Edit: my post may seem like I'm putting down the Phantom, I do think it's a stupid project, however I also see a huge potential for exploitation. If they sell this "console" for $300 I can easily see it replaceing my XBOX as my emulator player/media player of choice. Not to mention the "Downlaoding of rented games" feature could be "fixed" so that your rental never expires. That said, the console is probably going to end up as a grain of salt dropped in the sea.. you won't even know it's there.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 30, 2003, 12:13:00 AM
-
There being three systems on the market is a bit much, and the fact that there are games on each one we want to play, but don't want to buy a whole other system for is BS. We would love to be able to play all of the games on one system. So it isn't us who are greedy...but the console developers. Games are a work of art we all want to experience, but having to own three different systems to experience them all...pure poppy cock.
It is a shame that we will never be able to experience all three on our XBoxes...but hey...atleast we can experience plenty of classic "art" right? I hope I still have some respect from the message board (assuming I ever had any). Anywho...deusprogrammer is going to sleep.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: SSSSSmokey on June 08, 2003, 10:09:00 PM
-
Pirates WOULD be the only ones playing the emulator! Why would someone go to the trouble of trying to get it working if they already had a ps2?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on June 10, 2003, 04:01:00 PM
-
Well, you know one thing that I hate though, some things are priced higher than they could be simply because the companies know that they can sell it at whatever price. By using extensive marketing data, and a bit of math, they know the perfect balance between screwing you, and charging a cent less than what you'd otherwise pay. IMO, working for maximum profit sucks. Notice how you'll see a game that costs $60 at first, then ONLY 4 months later the price is $30?
Notice in another scenario, how I have a 20 year old microwave that still works perfectly fine, yet the new ones you buy these days last 2 years at the max and cost roughly the same price as that 20 year old one did, because they are built extra cheaply because the company earns more. Now you're telling me that the companies are the innocent ones in all of this?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mattssogay on June 13, 2003, 07:03:00 AM
-
Thats not exactly true. Sony or M$ most likely do tell the stores what to sell them at. Think about it. Dont you think you'd see a price difference between stores at least a little bit if that were true? Almost everywhere you go its 49.99 or 29.99 or 19.99 depending on what your looking at.
Another reason this doesnt make sense is that Every single console that Sony or M$ sells they sell as a loss leader. If your going to do something like that as a company you would have to be able to make up for it somehow i.e. selling software and regulating the prices that people sell it for.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: AlphaWolf on June 14, 2003, 11:56:00 AM
-
First of all I never said to boycott anything, I was only pointing out whats wrong with these companies after you said earlier that they are the innocent ones. I never pay full price for games anyways though, so I could honestly give a rats ass, you guys can go ahead and let yourselves get screwed; it doesn't affect me in the slightest bit.
Second of all, the stores do not necessarily have full controll over the price. Some companies can become so well known by the consumer, that they will actively refuse to sell to certain retailers if they don't sell their product at a specified price, this way none of their retailers are undercutting each other, and everybody pays the same price. Why do they do this? Simple, because its far more profitable. Bose is a big example of this.
Third of all, if there was only one console, that would hardly change shit in terms of game quality. When a games developer developes a game, they are going to sell it, even if its for only one platform. The only advantage to having multiple platforms is that the licensing costs generaly go down, -but- on that same note, you get platform exclusives that require the end user to shell out another $200 for a new peice of hardware when that game could have easily been made for their already existing hardware. Sure, the two companies involved (hardware developer and software developer) do win on exclusives by discounting each other, but you certainly do not.
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Mattssogay on June 17, 2003, 04:18:00 AM
-
Thats exactly what i was saying Circuit City, Best Buy, GameStop, NewGame for Xbox=$49.99. Having one price for an item isn't competition. I believe that is called Price Fixing.
Does anyone know the cost of a production DVD Game for the Xbox Vs. the Retail?(Not Including advertisements or Developement just straight cost)
Or how about the cost of developing a blockbuster like Halo for Example?
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: mxlegend99 on June 26, 2003, 07:29:00 PM
-
LOL, well the odds are just as good as having an Xbox Emulate a gamecube or PS2
But i can see where all parties are coming form, only the rewriting of HArdware calls, would be quite alot of work. But when this comes into play, its not emulation, its a Port. Why do you think the Xbox runs Quake2x so well? Its been rewritten to use specific Xbox calls, but this is only possible, when you have the source code...... Now why dont someone try and get there hands on the source for a playstation 2 game, and try this. I want Vice City, Hodr, your task, is to recompile GTA Vice City from PS2, to the Xbox.
I dont see why we want the Xbox to emulate the PS2, sure it would be nice, but it would be better to improve on PC emulation in the xbox. Most PS2 games, are on the PC (GTA3/Vice) and if we had a program that could emulate a PC better than bochs, we might be able to hit 5fps in GTA3
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: mxlegend99 on June 26, 2003, 07:30:00 PM
-
See, heres the right idea. If we can make the Xbox emulate a 2.8Ghz CPU, then have it emulate Windows, We can have it then run all the PC games
Cheers to this idea
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: ZASADAR on July 22, 2003, 04:53:00 PM
-
this makes modn xbox almost pointless.........
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: Jonesy_47 on August 16, 2003, 03:09:00 PM
-
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: HeLiuM on October 19, 2003, 08:47:00 AM
-
7 years of your life. oh, and some plastic.
anyway, the reason i would want emulators in the first place is i like carrying 50 game consoles around with me in a nice little (although relatively large) package
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: tweaqr on October 29, 2003, 11:13:00 PM
-
im going to have to agree with mage on this i live in the barrics and although i have all of the systems i have emulators for i dont have room to set them up
-
Title: The Final Word On Xbox Emulation
Post by: dcxbox on December 23, 2003, 05:24:00 PM
-
it was called the indrema, thats the name of the linux based system... the company was gonna make money off of hardware... games would be free licenced unlike conosles, more like pc s where anyone can make a game and sell it or give it away.
Post by: modT on February 19, 2006, 06:22:00 PM
Post by: awal on February 19, 2006, 09:48:00 PM
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 16, 2003, 11:01:00 PM
Every system has it's own unique and different hardware. And each system has it's own individual coding methods and SDKs. So obviously you can't just play a PS2 game on the XBox and so on. Because the coding is different and written for a different set of hardware.
What an emulator does is recreates the specific hardware for another system with software. And then that software runs on the hardware of the host system. So just imagine for a second. Two systems that are just about on par with each other as far as speed goes. The only way to get full speed would be to have the true hardware for the system. Software could never hope to emulate a system that is close to the same speed as the host hardware. For a good example, think of hardware rendering vs software rendering...which is faster? The hardware of course.
Another way to think of it is when you put a game in your PS2, the game just runs right off the hardware. If you were trying to emulate it on the XBox, first it would go into the software and have it's code and commands changed to the native language of the XBox, and then that new code would be run. And being that the systems are so closely matched in speed, the emulation would be very, very, very unplayably slow. And the problem with PS2 emulation is there really isn't even a working one for the PC yet.
Now why can older systems be emulated? Because compared to a PS2, their hardware is very simple to manage with an emulator. The XBox can manage the code fast enough to keep the game going at a steady clip. I know this isn't an in depth explanation, but I thought I would put it in laymen's terms.
Basically...here is the gist of what I just said...PS2, Dreamcast, and especially Gamecube emulation is not going to happen on the XBox. It just can't handle it. Granted one could be made, but it would be so slow and ugly it wouldn't even be worth the effort.
Anyways...case closed...after reading this there should be no reason for anyone to ask questions about why PS2 emulation can't be done.
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 17, 2003, 12:03:00 AM
Post by: XDelusion on May 17, 2003, 12:47:00 AM
You have the speed ton consider, and the RAM, the RAM being the harder to explain.
Also, many people believe that if the N64 can be emulated, then the Dreamcast should be emulatable as well, what they fail to understand is that the Dreamcast is FAR more advanced than the N64, I guess you would have to own one and play the better titles that came out for it to see. Give the Dreamcast a DVD ROM for extra storage space, and it could easily compete with a PS2 any day!
Post by: lucas on May 17, 2003, 02:50:00 AM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 17, 2003, 03:23:00 AM
Its just not feasible.
Nevertheless the fact that on ~2ghz systems we get 10-15fps only
Post by: rhawk79 on May 17, 2003, 11:57:00 AM
Post by: Lowen Na on May 17, 2003, 12:07:00 PM
| QUOTE (rhawk79 @ May 17 2003, 08:21 PM) |
| Is XBOX2 going to be able to run XBOX1 games (& software) ?? If so, that's the only way I can picture a PS2, DC or Gamecube emulator being worth the effort. Working on them now knowing that they'll eventually run on an XBOX2. |
Hello, McFly! Anybody Home?!?!?
The are being worked on FOR THE PC. Once a PS2 or DC emulator is working well on the PC then someone might start to work on porting to an other system that might stand a chance of running it.
In the mean while, there is not point to porting emulators that don't work well to a hardware platform than can't run it.
Post by: SSSSSmokey on May 17, 2003, 01:51:00 PM
Post by: rhawk79 on May 17, 2003, 03:52:00 PM
Post by: dmb062082 on May 17, 2003, 06:58:00 PM
| QUOTE (lucas @ May 17 2003, 11:14 AM) |
| but what if i nail roadkill to my xbox and wear an onion on my belt? then could i emulate xbox2 on my xbox? |
dont ever reply to any of my quotes telling me I act like a child.
As for the topic at hand yes you pretty much hit the nail on the head. Its never going to happen on our xbox's anyway. Or most of your PC'S for that matter. And thats even if a ps2 or DC emu even existed. Possibly if the xbox 2 (or any other next generation system) is hackable it just could happen. But I would imagine you will need a PC at least 2x more powerfull than the current console you are trying to emulate to enjoy it.
As for emulating a n64 saturn psx or a 3d0 pcfx (last generation systems) that however is possible (Though there are a few emulators on my list not currently emulated) as they are older and obsolete compared to the power of our pesonal computers and now xbox's!
Just had to throw my 2 cents in, adiods.
This post has been edited by dmb062082: May 18 2003, 02:01 AM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 18, 2003, 12:04:00 AM
Once Satourne has a good dynarec then we'll see.
Post by: Lowen Na on May 18, 2003, 05:15:00 PM
| QUOTE (rhawk79 @ May 18 2003, 12:16 AM) |
| yea that's true, for a port, obviously there are no working pc emulators so there's nothing to port in the first place. i was saying that in case anybody is trying to build one for the xbox from the ground up. |
I am sure that this is real likely to happen.
Post by: HeLiuM on May 19, 2003, 06:22:00 PM
| QUOTE (CyRUS64 @ May 17 2003, 12:23 PM) |
| Yep, the total internal memory for a dc comes to ~35MB alone (this is what my savestates come to anyhow uncompressed), and then there is a lot more ram required for the program itself, aswell processing ram, cached texture storage,etc... and a half-decent dynarec alone would want a lot more megabytes too. Its just not feasible. Nevertheless the fact that on ~2ghz systems we get 10-15fps only |
thats 10-15 fps for a highly unoptimized engine. eventually im sure we could get a near full speed emu on say a 2.6ghz comp
| QUOTE |
| you will NEVER see Gamecube let alone Dreamcast on the XBOX. |
that should definately be the other way around
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 20, 2003, 12:43:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| thats 10-15 fps for a highly unoptimized engine. eventually im sure we could get a near full speed emu on say a 2.6ghz comp |
Certainly on some games we are aiming for ~2ghz, but a celeron 733 is still out of the question =)
Post by: BenzineX on May 20, 2003, 12:42:00 AM
Post by: XDelusion on May 20, 2003, 03:42:00 PM
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 22, 2003, 10:18:00 PM
Dynamic recompilation is exactly the same as a standard interpreter emu except when emulating the cpu which is often the bottleneck in emulating nex-gen systems. Thus instead of continuously fetching and executing the asm instructions one by one, it just fetches them in blocks (up to jmp/bra instructions) compiles them to native x86 blocks and then each time that same block gets hit, they just executed the compiled x86 block.
There is HLE which can mean a variety of things ranging from intercepting display lists and just high-level processing them and sending them direct to a 3d gfx card, and also function-level hle which detects pre-known library functions and replaces them with pre-written fast code.
I don't have time to go into any more detail though
These two techniques are what have been used in all n64 emus.
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 22, 2003, 11:47:00 PM
| QUOTE (Hodr @ May 22 2003, 10:38 PM) |
| However, that is not the only method of emulation, nor is it necessarily the prefered method. There are emulators that work through Dynamic recompilation of the original software. What this entails is an interpreter that reads the source and converts each "hardware" call to the equivalent call on the native hardware (which is often straight forward unless you are dealing with systems that do strange things like store 128bit registers etc.). The process need only be done once, then the new program can be run natively. This is old hat to most linux/unix/bsd/etc. users who must recompile for different systems. And before you start screaming about needing "source code" to do this, you dont. There are decompilers for most languages and the ones that don't have them usually have problems with the fact that parts of the code can be stored in multiple locations (.dll files for etc.) that the decompiler may have no knowledge of. But being that this decompiler would be written for a closed sytem you wouldn't have those problems. |
Even if this did work the way you are describing it, most processor instructions do not have an exact equivalent function on another processor. You'll need to execute another 2-8 or so instructions on the host processor just to perform the same function as the emulated processor. Even if you wrote an emulator that was as fast as it could possibly be (e.g. code fully optimized to the teeth), you still won't get full speed on a different-yet-equivalent host processor.
Post by: Hodr on May 25, 2003, 11:25:00 AM
And to AlphaWolf- As I mentioned before, barring things like differences in register sizes or entire missing functions (like the inability to do integer addition or something) most processors have the same basic functions. And even if it does take 2-8 instructions to perform the equivalent some of them, that doesn't mean it will be slower/faster. Thats like saying RISC cpu's are always slower than CISC because they require more instructions to get something done (BTW, most will say RISK are faster....). But your forgetting that it may also be the case that something that takes 2-8 instructions on the emulated cpu can be done in 1 on the intel cpu. Besides which, any wildely different low level instructions are probably only going to deal with memory subsystems and calls to the graphic rendering devices, all of which are going to be replaced by different calls that do not perform the exact same function, as the hardware is different.
I didn't say it was easy, or that it would be pretty, all I said was that it is possible. I had to do something similar years ago in school. I was tasked to write a virtual machine that would execute Sparc assembly on an x86 system. I did that, but I also wrote a line by line interpreter that converted the assembly so that it could be compiled and run natively (which re-used about 90% of the code from the vm). Can you guess which one worked better? Even ignoring the time spent to interpret the code in the VM, the compiled version was still faster because the native x86 compiler was able to optimize the code (instead of just running it as it came like the vm) for that platform, which had different strengths and weaknesses.
Post by: ector on May 25, 2003, 01:24:00 PM
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 25, 2003, 03:22:00 PM
| QUOTE (Hodr @ May 25 2003, 01:25 PM) |
| And to AlphaWolf- As I mentioned before, barring things like differences in register sizes or entire missing functions (like the inability to do integer addition or something) most processors have the same basic functions. |
General purpose processors, maybe, but application specific processors are a whole other ballgame, and you are going to have to deal with that if you want to emulate these consoles.
Post by: jp110099 on May 25, 2003, 03:25:00 PM
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 26, 2003, 08:06:00 AM
| QUOTE (Hodr @ May 25 2003, 10:27 PM) |
| Alpha- Which application specific processors are you talking about... DSP's for audio (I think thats easily taken care of considering the xbox does have onboard sound...) special graphics chips (didn't we cover that three times now?), special chips for handling nontraditional memory structures (I mentioned that in my last post....) Which other application specific processors are there? |
I am talking about all of the above. Odds are not even one of these is going to be similar enough to the emulated system to get even close to 1:1 emulation. Graphics chips especialy, these always differ a hell of a lot. Even general purpose processors are a big maybe.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 09:12:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I havn't messed with any 64 emulators since the first came out, but I dont think I remember hearing about any that actually recompile the entire rom before executing so that it would not have to waste cycles doing it while executing |
I have the src to an n64 'emu' that tries to preconvert n64 games to a x86-runnable .exe. However something like Zelda comes out to be ~500+MB and doesn't work much
As Ector says you just can't do it that way. You're having to predictively try and trace through all the possible routes through the code and its just not really very feasible for nex-gen consoles.
| QUOTE |
| Besides, it really doesn't matter if they have one general purpose processor or 40 specific processors, if we worked from the premise that the systems are basically equal in "Power" (as was stated in the initial post) then the functions of these specific processors should be able to be mapped to the general processor of the Xbox or one of the supporting processors (sound/GPU). |
Even if you could do all this 'mapping' you still need to simulate the central cpus and that takes time
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 09:31:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| I guess the bottom line is that, if the graphic processing capabilities of the xbox are similar in strength to that of the ps2 (and have sufficiently similar effects, I.E. each has a "form" of volumetric lighting etc.) and the main cpu can keep up with that of the PS2, then it would be technically possible to write an emulator that could work full speed. |
Uh, you don't know much about the PS2 do you? In theory it is easier to write an xbox emulator on the ps2. There is one major bottleneck you run in to when emulating the PS2 on any DX8-based arch, you CANNOT use hardware to do vector unit emulation. The issue there is the fact that DX8 has a very limited vertex and pixel shader languages, which causes many things which can easily be done in the vector units impossible to do in the gpu on the xbox.
There are 4 COMPLETE processors (R5900, IOP, VU0, VU1) running in the ps2, to emulate all four on a 733Mhz system, isn't possible. There aren't enough cycles to makeup for the fact that it has smaller GPRs, and that it has to emulate 3 different ISA. I could continue about other reasons the xbox itself isn't powerful enough, but those reasons alone are enough if you know anything about hardware. (The R5900 has 32 128-bit GPRs which are being used nearly all the time.)
Don't just speculate, do some hard research before you try to compare specs, since the specs alone are useless.
Xbox2 might be able to emulate it, depending on the specs and amount of ram. But anyone who honestly thinks there is going to be a ps2 emulator for xbox, needs to learn about hardware.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 10:47:00 AM
(and thats with interpreter and not dynarec - and the demo ran at ~6-7 fps on my p3-850!)
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 26, 2003, 01:39:00 PM
| QUOTE (CyRUS64 @ May 26 2003, 12:47 PM) |
| The fact is that out of Dreamcast, Playstation 2, X-Box, and Gamecube, NONE can be emulated on any of the others full-speed. The X-Box has a chance at emulating the dc slowly, but the ram limitations of the x-box even make that very difficult. |
Hmm...I don't know much about DC, but what if you HLE'd the entire thing?
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 26, 2003, 02:15:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Hmm...I don't know much about DC, but what if you HLE'd the entire thing? |
What do you want to hle?
The graphics display lists are already hle'd, since lowlevel emulating the pvr chip would be both damn hard and damn slow. Other than that the seperate chips on the dreamcast are 'hle'd' too such as maple bus (for controllers), gdrom controller, rom board controller, sh4 modules, system asic etc and even the arm has a IcFakeARM mode.
But even so the SH4 does most of the work, and even with a v.good dynarec it takes a lot of processor power to emulate. All you can do with the code running on that is manually add 'hle functions' for the various library functions, but that takes a lot of time and won't help speed that drastically relative to dynarec.
The reason N64 is so hle'able is because it has co-processors, the rdp and rsp, that do a lot of work, and all emus merely high-level emulate them for the speed benefits - the R4300 still has to be essentially emulated though, but then its a much lesser processor than a sh4. The rdp can be hle'd since there are very few different microprograms that are loaded onto them since Nintendo didn't give out the docs to most companies. Technically the same could be feasible for the PS2 - the vector co-processors and IOP (ps1 chip) could be fully hle'd and only the central processor need be emulated but the problem is that all companies design their own programs to run on the vector copros so there'd be far too many different microprogs to reverse and emulate, but I guess they may end up doing this for certain games.
Gamecube and x-box also will have limited hle since the central processor does nearly all of the work, and the gpu can only really be hle'd. (However of course x-box uses such a mappable api that the cxbx project could easily produce an 'emulator' that should run faster than ps2, gc, or dc emus - all the api functions would be intercepted so the emulation of the central cpu doesn't really do that much work - you could try this for the dc api too, say, but then it'd take ages and be very non-compatible since katana, at least, is just not really easily mappable)
-CyRUS
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 03:12:00 PM
A game can be using the vector units for graphics one moment, and the next for just straight math.
Or vu0 is acting as a co-processor while vu1 is doing graphics.
So it'd have to be game specific.
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 03:58:00 PM
And I didn't say the graphics ruitines could be directly mapped. I claimed they could be replaced by roughly equivalent functions (i.e. if one system does gouraud shading and the other does flat shading, you make do with what you have). This obviously doesn't give a 100% emulation, but could in theory produce something usable.
But as I stated every time so far, I don't believe its likely to be done (and as Cyrus pointed out, attempts thus far for other systems have been failures).
And as far as the vertex shaders go, I can't really argue because your assumption that I don't know the specific hardware is correct.
I have decided, as sort of a proof of concept to see if I can find a suitable system to emulate on the Franklin eBookman (Which I am familiar with) which utilizes the SNK32 processor (http://download.fran...snk32_main.html). Yes, I know it won't prove anything about the specific setup we have been discussing (the big difference being the specialized graphic hardware) etc. but it might at least prove that the theory is valid.
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 04:07:00 PM
Post by: Mage on May 26, 2003, 04:27:00 PM
| QUOTE (Hodr @ May 26 2003, 05:07 PM) |
| but if you actually read any of my posts you would have remembered that I never claimed it could "emulate" any of those instruction sets, my whole premise was that "pre-compiling" for the xbox would eliminate the need to do so. |
Even if you were to use said "pre-compiling", the xbox won't have enough Mhz to execute all the units at the same time, at near proper speeds. Many cycles are going to be wasted on the fact that the Intel processor doesn't have enough registers, or the fact that they're too small.
On top of that, writing such a pre-compiler is going to be quite a feat anyways. Dealing with code branches that can only be determined at run-time are going to cause major problems.
But sure anything can be done in theory, but theory is just that theory. In theory a person can write an autonomous piece of software that can design other software, however the reality of that happening anytime soon is nil. If it isn't useful in reality, then what's the point?
In the end I'd call it an empty pipedream.
Post by: Hodr on May 26, 2003, 10:37:00 PM
On those grounds I would have to agree with you that a full speed emulation would be next to impossible.
The branching I dont see being as much of a problem. I would imaging no matter how or where it branches, its going to go to another piece of code that has been translated (but it could not exactly be automadic as the new ruitine may start befor or after where the previous location was). Barring self modifying code, which your not likely to see on an optical medium, this would be a small problem in comparison to the other problems that would already have to be overcome to get this far.
In any case, its all moot considering no one is likely to go so far as to write a disassembler comprehensive enough to support what I suggested anyways.
Post by: CyRUS64 on May 27, 2003, 04:42:00 AM
You just couldn't precompile these binaries.
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 27, 2003, 09:07:00 AM
| QUOTE (Hodr @ May 27 2003, 12:37 AM) |
| Barring self modifying code, which your not likely to see on an optical medium |
What would an optical medium have to do with anything?
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 27, 2003, 12:52:00 PM
Post by: xionanx on May 28, 2003, 12:31:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| In theory a person can write an autonomous piece of software that can design other software, however the reality of that happening anytime soon is nil. If it isn't useful in reality, then what's the point? |
Not to piss in your cornflakes, but last months Scientific American had a little blurb about a new device that was recently invented that has the ablility to autonomously invent anything else. Just enter what you want, hit the go button, and give it some time and it will spit out something that fits your needs. There go all those invention grants
Anyway, there are already PS2 games being run near perfect on the XBOX. MGS2 is an example, however it does have some slighte slow down compared to its PS2 counterpart, which I never noticed any slowdown playing. The idea of completely decompiling a game then recompiling it to run on the XBOX has merit. Most of us have upgraded our HD's, so I personally can imagine a program that could be run once to completelely copy a PS2 game to the XBOX HD, decompile it, then recompile it to run on the XBOX. It would take hours/days for the initial run to de/recompile, and then will most likely still require some emulated assistance to run PS2 code that doesn't direclty translate, but it is feasible.
Technically that wouldn't be a true "emulator" though. Plus i'm sure it would require extensive knowledge of both systems. Or am I just crazy?
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 28, 2003, 09:10:00 AM
| QUOTE (xionanx @ May 28 2003, 02:31 AM) |
| Technically that wouldn't be a true "emulator" though. Plus i'm sure it would require extensive knowledge of both systems. Or am I just crazy? |
Heres the simplest way that this could be explained to you. Lets say that I wrote a program that just displays "hello world" in C. Now the way C is meant to be (read that, meant, not necessarily is), I can compile that program into machine language on the platform of my choosing. In doing this, it runs at faster speeds because its in the machines native language rather than having the machine translate tons of psuedocode on the fly. Now, lets say I compiled this hello world program for the powerpc platform, it would be then be basicaly rewritten into the powerpc assembly language, which is a lot more difficult to understand than C. Lets say that I wanted to now run this program on the x86 platform, all I have to do is take my source code, and recompile it for the X86 platform, that way I end up with a binary coded in x86 assembly language. Now lets say that I lost the source code for some reason, but I absolutely must run this program that I compiled for the powerpc platform on x86. I have two possible approaches, one approach would be to take the assembly code, and translate it to x86 by hand. The problem with this is assembly language is EXTREMELY difficult to work with, even with a simple hello world program, thats why most people write programs in a higher level language, and wouldn't dare think about translating a game to another machine language without the source code. Another way is that I could use an emulator to emulate the PPC platform, and we all know where that leads us.
Now source code is something highly coveted in the electronics industry, with a programs source code, you can do practicaly anything with it with very relative ease, including porting it from one platform to another without having to emulate it. The problem is that source code being as coveted as it is, you are probably never going to be able to get ahold of the code for "your favorite game here" within your lifetime.
Post by: Mage on May 28, 2003, 11:15:00 AM
| QUOTE (xionanx @ May 28 2003, 01:31 AM) | ||
Not to piss in your cornflakes, but last months Scientific American had a little blurb about a new device that was recently invented that has the ablility to autonomously invent anything else. Just enter what you want, hit the go button, and give it some time and it will spit out something that fits your needs. There go all those invention grants Anyway, there are already PS2 games being run near perfect on the XBOX. MGS2 is an example, however it does have some slighte slow down compared to its PS2 counterpart, which I never noticed any slowdown playing. The idea of completely decompiling a game then recompiling it to run on the XBOX has merit. Most of us have upgraded our HD's, so I personally can imagine a program that could be run once to completelely copy a PS2 game to the XBOX HD, decompile it, then recompile it to run on the XBOX. It would take hours/days for the initial run to de/recompile, and then will most likely still require some emulated assistance to run PS2 code that doesn't direclty translate, but it is feasible. Technically that wouldn't be a true "emulator" though. Plus i'm sure it would require extensive knowledge of both systems. Or am I just crazy? |
Maybe you should read the articles.
Anyways whatever the article was, it isn't as you say.
Such an invention is a holy-grail of AI, and would be published everywhere.
I recieved nothing regarding it, and I deal with AI often.
Even if it is a basic Expert system on physical designs using a hybrid learning system, that still wouldn't be able to design programs. So it isn't the same thing.
If decompiling and then recompiling a program to another system was so easy, everyone would have done that already. I can tell you don't ever decompile programs or you wouldn't have said such an idea.
Before anyone chimes in about doing it with MIPS-I or 32-bit sparc ISA, we're talking about modern ISA, not easy to deal with ones. There would be MANY issues that in the end make emulating easier. To be able to convert, you need to know how to emulate, so why not just write an emulator instead?
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 05:06:00 PM
Post by: AlphaWolf on May 28, 2003, 05:19:00 PM
| QUOTE (deusprogrammer @ May 28 2003, 07:06 PM) |
| Why doesn't anyone listen to me? It's not a question of can we, it's a question of should we. And the answer to both questions is no. |
If somebody wants to write an emulator for a nextgen system, why shouldn't they? If you don't like it, don't use it, simple as that.
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 07:28:00 PM
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 28, 2003, 10:18:00 PM
Post by: xionanx on May 29, 2003, 01:02:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| If decompiling and then recompiling a program to another system was so easy, everyone would have done that already. I can tell you don't ever decompile programs ... |
I never said it would be easy, thats why I said that it would probably require extensive knowledge of both systems, and possibly hours/days for the program to decompile then recompile the code.
So, it is feasible, just highly unlikely.
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 29, 2003, 02:44:00 PM
Post by: xionanx on May 29, 2003, 09:42:00 PM
Edit: my post may seem like I'm putting down the Phantom, I do think it's a stupid project, however I also see a huge potential for exploitation. If they sell this "console" for $300 I can easily see it replaceing my XBOX as my emulator player/media player of choice. Not to mention the "Downlaoding of rented games" feature could be "fixed" so that your rental never expires. That said, the console is probably going to end up as a grain of salt dropped in the sea.. you won't even know it's there.
Post by: deusprogrammer on May 30, 2003, 12:13:00 AM
There being three systems on the market is a bit much, and the fact that there are games on each one we want to play, but don't want to buy a whole other system for is BS. We would love to be able to play all of the games on one system. So it isn't us who are greedy...but the console developers. Games are a work of art we all want to experience, but having to own three different systems to experience them all...pure poppy cock.
It is a shame that we will never be able to experience all three on our XBoxes...but hey...atleast we can experience plenty of classic "art" right? I hope I still have some respect from the message board (assuming I ever had any). Anywho...deusprogrammer is going to sleep.
Post by: SSSSSmokey on June 08, 2003, 10:09:00 PM
Post by: AlphaWolf on June 10, 2003, 04:01:00 PM
Notice in another scenario, how I have a 20 year old microwave that still works perfectly fine, yet the new ones you buy these days last 2 years at the max and cost roughly the same price as that 20 year old one did, because they are built extra cheaply because the company earns more. Now you're telling me that the companies are the innocent ones in all of this?
Post by: Mattssogay on June 13, 2003, 07:03:00 AM
| QUOTE (Orochidp @ Jun 12 2003, 07:13 PM) |
| Oh, and it's the Store's decision what to sell the games at, not the developer. Soo... boycott EB Games, not Sony. |
Thats not exactly true. Sony or M$ most likely do tell the stores what to sell them at. Think about it. Dont you think you'd see a price difference between stores at least a little bit if that were true? Almost everywhere you go its 49.99 or 29.99 or 19.99 depending on what your looking at.
Another reason this doesnt make sense is that Every single console that Sony or M$ sells they sell as a loss leader. If your going to do something like that as a company you would have to be able to make up for it somehow i.e. selling software and regulating the prices that people sell it for.
Post by: AlphaWolf on June 14, 2003, 11:56:00 AM
| QUOTE (Orochidp @ Jun 12 2003, 12:13 PM) |
| Well, if there was only 1 console, like many people have suggested, it would be 20 times worse. Without that insane amount of profit, the companies would lose SO much money a year. NOt many games are stellar hits, you know, and a single bad game could destroy a company if they didn't charge obscene prices. The 3 consoles keep each other in check. Oh, and it's the Store's decision what to sell the games at, not the developer. Soo... boycott EB Games, not Sony. |
First of all I never said to boycott anything, I was only pointing out whats wrong with these companies after you said earlier that they are the innocent ones. I never pay full price for games anyways though, so I could honestly give a rats ass, you guys can go ahead and let yourselves get screwed; it doesn't affect me in the slightest bit.
Second of all, the stores do not necessarily have full controll over the price. Some companies can become so well known by the consumer, that they will actively refuse to sell to certain retailers if they don't sell their product at a specified price, this way none of their retailers are undercutting each other, and everybody pays the same price. Why do they do this? Simple, because its far more profitable. Bose is a big example of this.
Third of all, if there was only one console, that would hardly change shit in terms of game quality. When a games developer developes a game, they are going to sell it, even if its for only one platform. The only advantage to having multiple platforms is that the licensing costs generaly go down, -but- on that same note, you get platform exclusives that require the end user to shell out another $200 for a new peice of hardware when that game could have easily been made for their already existing hardware. Sure, the two companies involved (hardware developer and software developer) do win on exclusives by discounting each other, but you certainly do not.
Post by: Mattssogay on June 17, 2003, 04:18:00 AM
| QUOTE (Orochidp @ Jun 14 2003, 06:24 PM) |
| I'm just gonna say that you've never been to Circuit City, where all of the games are still $50. The reason stores price it the way they do is to compete with OTHER stores. Sure, the companies give suggestions to the stores, but the stores don't have to follow them. |
Thats exactly what i was saying Circuit City, Best Buy, GameStop, NewGame for Xbox=$49.99. Having one price for an item isn't competition. I believe that is called Price Fixing.
Does anyone know the cost of a production DVD Game for the Xbox Vs. the Retail?(Not Including advertisements or Developement just straight cost)
Or how about the cost of developing a blockbuster like Halo for Example?
Post by: mxlegend99 on June 26, 2003, 07:29:00 PM
LOL, well the odds are just as good as having an Xbox Emulate a gamecube or PS2
But i can see where all parties are coming form, only the rewriting of HArdware calls, would be quite alot of work. But when this comes into play, its not emulation, its a Port. Why do you think the Xbox runs Quake2x so well? Its been rewritten to use specific Xbox calls, but this is only possible, when you have the source code...... Now why dont someone try and get there hands on the source for a playstation 2 game, and try this. I want Vice City, Hodr, your task, is to recompile GTA Vice City from PS2, to the Xbox.
I dont see why we want the Xbox to emulate the PS2, sure it would be nice, but it would be better to improve on PC emulation in the xbox. Most PS2 games, are on the PC (GTA3/Vice) and if we had a program that could emulate a PC better than bochs, we might be able to hit 5fps in GTA3
Post by: mxlegend99 on June 26, 2003, 07:30:00 PM
| QUOTE (AlexsWeiner @ Jun 22 2003, 03:58 PM) |
| how about a pentium 4 2.8 ghz emulated on my xbox |
See, heres the right idea. If we can make the Xbox emulate a 2.8Ghz CPU, then have it emulate Windows, We can have it then run all the PC games
Cheers to this idea
Post by: ZASADAR on July 22, 2003, 04:53:00 PM
Post by: Jonesy_47 on August 16, 2003, 03:09:00 PM
Post by: HeLiuM on October 19, 2003, 08:47:00 AM
| QUOTE |
| Does anyone know the cost of a production DVD Game for the Xbox Vs. the Retail?(Not Including advertisements or Developement just straight cost) Or how about the cost of developing a blockbuster like Halo for Example? |
7 years of your life. oh, and some plastic.
anyway, the reason i would want emulators in the first place is i like carrying 50 game consoles around with me in a nice little (although relatively large) package
Post by: tweaqr on October 29, 2003, 11:13:00 PM
| QUOTE |
| Mage Posted: May 29 2003, 02:18 AM QUOTE (deusprogrammer @ May 28 2003, 11:18 PM) Coding the emulator...isn't lazy. But wanting an emulator now that will play PS2 games on the XBox is lazy and greedy. And the whole thing about having a PS2 that died is just an excuse. Stuff breaks, that doesn't entitle you to get it for free. All I am saying is that emulation should be for vintage gaming, not current generation gaming. Doesn't anyone else share my opinion? /QUOTE Free? You can still buy the games. The point is they already have a ps2, what right do you have to force them to play it on the ps2 then? Or to waste more money. They legally have the bios, and there are legit uses. If you assume everyone is using such things to pirate, that is where your views are flawed. I don't care about ps2 on xbox, it isn't going to happen. I hate the idea of being forced to play a game on specific hardware. Having to own three consoles (gc, xbox, ps2) just to play the games from the diff. companies I like is insane. Modern, or vintage, I support emulation. I like modern emulator, that is showing how advanced the scene is compared to just emulating dead systems. |
im going to have to agree with mage on this i live in the barrics and although i have all of the systems i have emulators for i dont have room to set them up
Post by: dcxbox on December 23, 2003, 05:24:00 PM
| QUOTE (xionanx @ May 30 2003, 06:42 AM) |
| Heh.. There is always gong to be some fool ready to jump in with a new console The PHANTOM woohoo.. be scared Anyway, I remember back before the XBOX was officially announced there was a group/company designing a linux based console that oddly enough had almost identical features to the XBOX. When the XBOX was announced it just kinda slipped into oblivion... Does anyone remember that console? I'm actually curious as to what happened to it, if only I could remember what it was called.. Edit: my post may seem like I'm putting down the Phantom, I do think it's a stupid project, however I also see a huge potential for exploitation. If they sell this "console" for $300 I can easily see it replaceing my XBOX as my emulator player/media player of choice. Not to mention the "Downlaoding of rented games" feature could be "fixed" so that your rental never expires. That said, the console is probably going to end up as a grain of salt dropped in the sea.. you won't even know it's there. |
it was called the indrema, thats the name of the linux based system... the company was gonna make money off of hardware... games would be free licenced unlike conosles, more like pc s where anyone can make a game and sell it or give it away.