Post by: Prican24 on March 27, 2004, 05:09:00 PM
tho do wish it could play top gear 3000 properly
as for someones comment on earthworm jim, man i owned both cart versions and snes got returned simply cuz its one of those rare games that genesis does better (remember aladdin
)
Post by: Iriez on March 27, 2004, 09:05:00 PM
Effing ridiculous.
Its like your TRYING to start some stupid lame flamewar over why XPORT SHOULD PORT TEH ZSNES TO THA XBOXER
Post by: muredrum on December 07, 2003, 09:09:00 AM
we already have a good one. why do we need this ?
thanks in advance.
Post by: Lightsier on December 07, 2003, 09:10:00 AM
Now a days, they're both basically on the same level. I don't see why it needs to be ported to Xbox, because snes9x is great enough I think.
Post by: gamemaster14 on December 07, 2003, 09:12:00 AM
Post by: mr jones on December 07, 2003, 09:14:00 AM
I'm all for multiple folks working on a particular system emulator. Carcharius, Hikaru, and Xport all have ports of Gens, with 2 of them being excellent. However, Xport mentioned that he doesn't have an interest in doing the Super Nintendo, so I'm not really seeing the point to this poll...
EDIT: Ah, it IS opened source. Time to go look at code.
Post by: Herculezz on December 07, 2003, 09:23:00 AM
Post by: kvajnto on December 07, 2003, 09:23:00 AM
EDIT: Also. As much as I love XPorts emulators, I really like the look and feel of snes9x better.
Post by: mr jones on December 07, 2003, 09:26:00 AM
Post by: CivX on December 07, 2003, 09:32:00 AM
| QUOTE (Herculezz @ Dec 7 2003, 07:14 PM) |
| Few Reasons - 1 - Relax / Samba Net Shares - Lantus has no interest in pursuing this. 2 - Net Play - ZSNES has much better net play integrated and Lantus has made perfectly clear that he will not pursue this feature. 3 - Xports GUI - One Gui for all your emulators makes it much easier and more configurable Lantus has also made it clear he will not be making XSNES9X any more skinnable. 4 - Xports EMU's are the best regardless!! Just a Few to Say the least. I could go on!! |
You seem to have personal issues with Lantus, and your post proves it. XPort emulators being the best? What? No offense to XPort, but there is no "best"; It's all personal opinion and what YOU prefer.
Voted 'No'
Post by: Gmc on December 07, 2003, 09:34:00 AM
Post by: Herculezz on December 07, 2003, 09:35:00 AM
| QUOTE (CivX @ Dec 7 2003, 07:32 PM) | ||
You seem to have personal issues with Lantus, and your post proves it. XPort emulators being the best? What? No offense to XPort, but there is no "best"; It's all personal opinion and what YOU prefer. Voted 'No' |
I have no personal issues with lantus- just done alot of research and seen what his response was to people wanting similiar features added to XSNES9X. And I apologize. In my opinion Xports EMU's are the best
Post by: Shadowland on December 07, 2003, 09:36:00 AM
vote = No
Post by: Herculezz on December 07, 2003, 09:42:00 AM
| QUOTE (Shadowland @ Dec 7 2003, 07:36 PM) |
| It would be pointless for Xport to do one given lantus's current work. vote = No |
and was it pointless for all the other coders to make different emus for various systems regardless how the other ones progress was. Come on now variety is good. There are multiples emu's for just about every system besides SNES
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
Post by: kvajnto on December 07, 2003, 09:57:00 AM
1. It will never happend. XPort has said before that he has NO interest in making a port of any SNES emulator (as there already is an excellent xbox-port).
2. If I remember correctly, and I think I do, then the code for ZSNES is written mainly in assembler. This would make it VERY, VERY hard for anyone except the original coders to try to port it.
Post by: Zero on December 07, 2003, 10:00:00 AM
Post by: Likklebaer on December 07, 2003, 10:09:00 AM
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.
Post by: lantus on December 07, 2003, 11:33:00 AM
Post by: Zero on December 07, 2003, 12:30:00 PM
Post by: Dahak on December 07, 2003, 01:13:00 PM
Post by: Iriez on December 07, 2003, 01:26:00 PM
| 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
Post by: Iriez on December 07, 2003, 01:27:00 PM
| 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.
Post by: Large Dopant white on December 07, 2003, 05:29:00 PM
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.
Post by: WilliamDecker on December 07, 2003, 09:44:00 PM
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.
Post by: Iriez on December 07, 2003, 09:55:00 PM
| 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.
Post by: Zero on December 07, 2003, 10:52:00 PM
| 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.
Post by: Zero on December 13, 2003, 06:41:00 PM
| 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?
Post by: Likklebaer on December 14, 2003, 01:49:00 AM
