emulator = perfection
Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:26 am
Complete SNES + TV = perfection++BMF54123 wrote:bsnes full-screen + decent gamepad + TV out = perfection.
qft.Fx3 wrote: Complete SNES + TV = perfection++
Fx3 wrote:Complete SNES + TV = perfection++ ;)BMF54123 wrote:bsnes full-screen + decent gamepad + TV out = perfection. :)
Code: Select all
#include <assert.h>
int main() {
bool perfection = true;
assert(perfection == perfection++);
}Intriguing, yet Google fails me. More info, please?The most recent IOS I have is that one that "Poisoned" SSBB
I think a fpga-based snes clone is already feasible nowadays.byuu wrote: Who knows, maybe in 10 years we'll have FPGA-like devices that can run C++-like code, and we can create cheap, easy-to-produce hardware devices with no latency issues.
A few years back I heard some guy had a bunch of pirated Nintendo Entertainment Systems. According to the rumor he went to prison.kyuusaku wrote:It seems far more common for people to port emulators to synthesized processor cores, than people actually designing the hardware. It is however very possible to fit a SNES into a modest FPGA (around 500k Xilinx gates) and even a Genesis/Neo Geo/CPS2 should fit in a slightly large one (probably closer to a million gates).
That might have been reasonable until the mid-2000s, when the Famicom/NES patents expired.ironfist61 wrote:A few years back I heard some guy had a bunch of pirated Nintendo Entertainment Systems. According to the rumor he went to prison.
I don't know if it was true,
But I remember some time in the 90's Some other guy was charged with piracy 'cause he was selling, giving away (I don't know) the complete schematics to the Famicom. I think he even had places to get the parts listed. I don't remember too much. If someone can help me out?
Everything about FPGA design is a pain. And even once you get good at it, it does no real good: nobody else is going to go through all that trouble to build their own.Making a game system on an FPGA always sounds like a fun project, but just doing the video hardware would be extremly hard
While the former is technically more impressive, I don't see much of a practical difference once you're emulating the hardware anyway. So long as the timing is the same, it'd be ideal to write in a language that's easier to understand.I contacted the guy thinking that he directly implemented the SNES hardware low-level style, but IIRC, he ported SNES9x to some CPU core running on the FPGA.
The only one I remember reading about was the (albeit very successful until he was sued) idiot selling NES-on-a-chip N64-knockoff controllers with ~30 copyrighted NES ROMs on-board. He got sued because of the games included.That might have been reasonable until the mid-2000s, when the Famicom/NES patents expired.
That's the beauty of HDLs, you can very easily port a SOC design from one system to another.byuu wrote:Everything about FPGA design is a pain. And even once you get good at it, it does no real good: nobody else is going to go through all that trouble to build their own.
In many cases, emulation is simply better. It's far more portable, saves an incredible amount of space, can do things like netplay, and using a mouse for super scope games is simply better than the unwieldy super scope itself. I grew up playing PC games, so crisp pixelated graphics look better to me than blur. And bsnes effectively has better audio than the original unit by avoiding the analog output. I don't want to hear any nonsense about developer intent in that regard. It's just a cheaper, inferior pathway in a day when digital ones were uncommon, that's all there is to it.Fx3 wrote:Complete SNES + TV = perfection++BMF54123 wrote:bsnes full-screen + decent gamepad + TV out = perfection.