If a submapper is required for it to function then it's already iNES 2, so... if you're allocating a new mapper at 256+ I see nothing wrong with using "submappers" to cram 16 mappers into one mapper, if you really want to do that... though again, quite moot at this point.Myask wrote:Just saying I'd've allocated VRC2 to one and its addressings to subs, but…well, backwards compatibility hobble.
Besides, if a new dump requires submapper support, then wouldn't that pressure emulator authors to implement it?
For the iNES 1 mapper plane of 0-255, though, I don't think it's a good idea. Preserve their existing function, and use submappers to refine it. If you're going to add new mappers to 0-255 we should try to make sure they're at least compatibly implementable as a single mapper without submappers. I.e. if the mapper can't be implemented in iNES 1, don't stick it in the iNES 1 plane.
If it's incompatible: yes, it needs a new mapper.AWJ wrote:I thought that bootleg mappers with similar but incompatible behaviour to a licensed publisher's mapper get their own full mapper number, not a submapper (e.g. the countless multicart-MMC3 variants)