Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

What do you want in Project64 ?

B

Ballard

New member
gendoikari4 said:
I actually have the origional hardware and I still use project 64. This is very common. Why do we do it? Because playing a game on the computer means higher resolution, higher fps, cheets, textures, gamestates, different controlers, etc. Emulation has always been about making the games better than they were on the origional system.

Aside from that, I think that you may have picked the one and only situation where adding such a draw distance feature would undermine the intended point of the game. Almost all people in Oot draw when they are still fairly far away, the only exception is the kakori children. This is not for any fps reason, but because it is meant to be there. it's magic or something.

Still, I would like that feature, it would make it easier to find patches of grass to cut down on MM, and make the world look larger in general for many games. It would, of course, be an option. Likely off by default.

The style of thought that says anything classic or origional is better by default is simply bad. Often older games are better, and often they are worse. There is nothing inherently sacred about the details of games we play. It's not like the bible where changing a detail is sacrilegious (not that I go for religion).
Click to expand...

No, you are wrong. Emulation has always been about preserving hardware and software in the event the stuff stops working someday. It's the hacker mentality like you have, that is screwing things up for us who actually want accurate emulation. You are the people that give emulation a bad name. I think it is sacreligious to hack into games and change them for your own purposes, but that's your deal, but don't impose that crap on me. Ok?

Project 64 as it is, is not cycle-accurate and does NOT perfectly emulate the hardware that already exists... so why the heck do you think MORE features should be added, when it doesn't even do ALL the stuff the original hardware can do?

I'm baffled.
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
Emulation is basically running a different system on the PC architecture (this is not the definition of emulation). Why authors do an emulator is up to them. Like there are now a DS emulator - yet the DS still lives and kicks like newborn. I wouldn't say emulation is to preserve something - it is more like a hobby and to code something amazing.
 
WhiteX

WhiteX

New member
Ballard, the reasons why they coded the emulator is theirs alone, if they were to code a perfect emulation of the hardware, it would be slow and most likely hard to use, now it seems that the point of the emus we have nowadays is to entertain the community and as a hobby to the coders.
Your last post is not very aprecciative of the community, and more so to the coders work, here we talk about more features to enhance the experience of playing a N64 game on a PC that now got way more power to add to the fun, not about accurate and professional emulation of hardware through software.
 
Clements

Clements

Active member
Moderator
If you want cycle accurate emulation for N64, it's already being done in MESS. The requirements would make the emulator unusable on even high-end systems for 3D stuff (if the driver is ever able to run them), and I think all the graphics will be rendered in software only, so it won't look pretty for all 3D games, probably worse than the real system because the N64 could do hardware anti-aliasing and trilinear filtering.

Project64's current High Level Emulation approach ensures high speed, low CPU use along with full hardware acceleration. Accuracy is currently high (and improving) with compatibility of about ~95% with commercial games. I couldn't imagine playing Goldeneye with full LLE rendered in software on my laptop. It would kill the battery in about 20 minutes.
 
Last edited:
B

Ballard

New member
Clements said:
If you want cycle accurate emulation for N64, it's already being done in MESS. The requirements would make the emulator unusable on even high-end systems for 3D stuff (if the driver is ever able to run them), and I think all the graphics will be rendered in software only, so it won't look pretty for all 3D games, probably worse than the real system because the N64 could do hardware anti-aliasing and trilinear filtering.

Project64's current High Level Emulation approach ensures high speed, low CPU use along with full hardware acceleration. Accuracy is currently high (and improving) with compatibility of about ~95% with commercial games. I couldn't imagine playing Goldeneye with full LLE rendered in software on my laptop. It would kill the battery in about 20 minutes.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, I really dig PJ64. My three year old P4 1.8Ghz HP Pavilion with XP Pro optimised for max performance, runs it great. My real unit got damaged in a flood and I'm just grateful I can enjoy those games again. Believe me, I'm not accuracy obsessed, considering I understand the overhead in making an emulator cycle the opcodes in the logical order the real hardware would ask. Honestly, BSNES runs like crap on my PC, so I use a "cheesulator" and man... those games look really close to the real deal. Emulation can be more of an illusion than anything. Most people want to enjoy the games, not worry about a slow draw-rate (NeoRage), and frying their motherboard.

But eventually, when we are all running at least 6 ghz in "old" machines, cycle-accurate emulators with be the norm.
 
Last edited:
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
Ballard said:
But eventually, when we are all running at least 6 ghz in "old" machines, cycle-accurate emulators with be the norm.
Click to expand...
Don't count on that. Just because our processors are fast doesn't mean we will need to take that step. If we want it, then it will be done, as it is already.
 
B

Ballard

New member
Why would we not want emulators to more accurately emulate the games, if processor speed is no longer an issue?

Do we, as emu enthusiasts not care if the games we play are just like the real hardware, or are we gonna continue to be okay with "cheesulators"?
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
Do you have any idea how hard it is to do such a thing? Don't be so selfish!
Why are not snes9x and zsnes cycle accurate? We could run cycle accurate snes emulators on today's processors.
The developers have chosen not to!
 
B

Ballard

New member
Doomulation said:
Do you have any idea how hard it is to do such a thing? Don't be so selfish!
Why are not snes9x and zsnes cycle accurate? We could run cycle accurate snes emulators on today's processors.
The developers have chosen not to!
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm fully aware of how it's done. Have you heard of BSNES? MESS? Who's this WE you're talking about?

You forget there are two segments of the emulation community. Freeloading gamers, just looking to play games. These are the people who think the iPod port of MAME .1 is cool, and break all kinds of forums rules asking dumb questions.

Then there are the coders, programmers and those learning the craft like me, who actually care about preserving the great video games they enjoyed and do it because the gaming industry more or less abandons those old games.

I can't speak for the guys from PJ64, but I'll bet they are working (for free) their buns off trying to make the best emulator possible that is playable on an average hardware paradigm. These guys understand what it would take, but also know it would require rediculous computers to run the thing.

Obviously the best choice is the original hardware, but some of us for various reasons have to enjoy their games on the software versions, and most programmers who give a damn, actually agree with me that accuracy is the goal. Realistic or otherwise.

In the meantime, if people want hacks and custom mods of the platform, they should learn C and make thier own emulator.

I'm working on one right now.... ;)
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
The point is, wether or not we have the hardware to make cycle accurate emulators, that will not always be the case, as with snes9x and zsnes. There will of course be those who write cycle accurate emulators, as there will always be. But do not expect that just because out hardware can handle it, all emulators must be.
 
B

Ballard

New member
Doomulation said:
The point is, wether or not we have the hardware to make cycle accurate emulators, that will not always be the case, as with snes9x and zsnes. There will of course be those who write cycle accurate emulators, as there will always be. But do not expect that just because out hardware can handle it, all emulators must be.
Click to expand...

We don't use PCs from 1999 do we? I hope not. Why should we use emulators that were authored in 1999 and simply patched over time? I can't speak for 9X because it's glitchy on my PC, but Z is okay, but it's ability to properly execute Mode 7 sucks; just play Axelay and see how bad it freaks out when the first boss appears. Such problems are evident in other games as well. I've played the BSNES version on a PC clocking 3+ ghz and it perfectly executes the Mode 7.

I think evolution of our understanding and execution of technology is essential and eventually, I believe, emulation will become more accurate accross the board. This is a given in almost everything high-tech.
 
Doomulation

Doomulation

?????????????????????????
Zsnes and snes9x both works fine for me and most my games that I have. And I ask you: why will not the authors of current emulators implemet cycle-accurate timing or simply create a new project or join an existing one that is cycle-accurate? The point is, and still remains, that whatever arguments you have, it is still up to the authors and believe it or not, some people do not have savvy computer specs such as us. Look around! There are lots of posts of POC gfx card and even slow processors. And again, I state, that it is up to the authors to do cycle accurate timing. Why it hasn't been done already, they themselves can answer. You must remember that most emulators are not commercial; they are not developed for our pleasure in mind; they are not being paid for this. They are doing it for their own reasons, and they choose what they want or not. It may be that they bow down to the wishes of the users, but somewhere they draw the line, as it is THEIR project, after all.
And remember that even though we are moving towards high tect, still some things are not possible and still we may not want to do some things. We could do cycle accurate timing if we wanted, as out specs mostly supports it, HOWEVER, we do not, because we choose TO NOT. Okay? That is my point. It's like... when we gain more powerful PCs, developers tend to slack more. Before, long before now, developers struggled to make everything fit into what we had then - but what about now? Now they slack; programs become slow (like typical AVC decoders vs CoreAVC, which is much faster). Life is becoming easy for us and we might not want to spend out time to do something as complicated as cycle accurate timing. But in the end, we will see if these words ring true or not. There will always be someone who wants that no one else wants.
 
WhiteX

WhiteX

New member
You forget there are two segments of the emulation community. Freeloading gamers, just looking to play games. These are the people who think the iPod port of MAME .1 is cool, and break all kinds of forums rules asking dumb questions.

Then there are the coders, programmers and those learning the craft like me, who actually care about preserving the great video games they enjoyed and do it because the gaming industry more or less abandons those old games.
Click to expand...
You just called all the users of Visual Boy Advance, ZSnes, Snes9X, PJ 64, and all the other PC emulators and all the ones coded to use on other consoles like PocketNes, SMS Advance, SnesDS and DSHeretic, in fact you called all of us, including yourself who uses ZSnes, of freeloaders and newbies that ask dumb questions.
 
C

cooliscool

Nintendo Zealot
Ballard said:
Yes, I'm fully aware of how it's done. Have you heard of BSNES? MESS? Who's this WE you're talking about?

You forget there are two segments of the emulation community. Freeloading gamers, just looking to play games. These are the people who think the iPod port of MAME .1 is cool, and break all kinds of forums rules asking dumb questions.

Then there are the coders, programmers and those learning the craft like me, who actually care about preserving the great video games they enjoyed and do it because the gaming industry more or less abandons those old games.

I can't speak for the guys from PJ64, but I'll bet they are working (for free) their buns off trying to make the best emulator possible that is playable on an average hardware paradigm. These guys understand what it would take, but also know it would require rediculous computers to run the thing.

Obviously the best choice is the original hardware, but some of us for various reasons have to enjoy their games on the software versions, and most programmers who give a damn, actually agree with me that accuracy is the goal. Realistic or otherwise.

In the meantime, if people want hacks and custom mods of the platform, they should learn C and make thier own emulator.

I'm working on one right now.... ;)
Click to expand...

Are you fucking serious? If you are, take your bitching elsewhere.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top