If one were to make a "VRC6" version of a song, and would only use the extra channels for reverb in 3 seconds of a 1 minute song, you'd ask yourself "why use VRC6 then ?". It's exactly what toku and I are trying to say.
We all agree on this. The problem is when it's used just to get rid of a limitation that affects 2% of the resulting work, instead of being used as a way to do something super cool that could not be done without it.rainwarrior wrote: The other thing that's maybe worth thinking about is that the MMC5 doesn't cost anything to someone who only works with emulators. You don't have to work for it, you don't have to pay for it, you don't have to offer any merits of your own to get this extended capability, you can just take it. In the actual NES era, it was a hefty additional cost per cartridge, not a decision made lightly, and of course, Nintendo first had to actually realize it was possible and build the chip that could do it. Even though Nintendo built the chip, they never saw fit to use it for any of their own games, interestingly enough, and it wasn't because they didn't want those capabilities. MMC5 had a very real cost, and that's why it was so rarely used.
I understand wanting to use it. NES + MMC5 is a retro platform that (marginally) existed in the real thing, and maybe some people enjoy it more when they don't have to work with the attribute limit, or they like having 3 extra channels of sound, or whatever. If you look at it by itself, ignore rarity, history, etc. and just look at what it can do, it's a fun platform to work with, I guess? Not the one I'd choose, but maybe you like it.
The second screenshot does not look any different from the first, to be honest, there's like no difference at all.
I guess it comes from here. At least that's the first doccumentation of MMC5 I can think of.I'm just curious, where does the term "ExGraphics" come from?