It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 7:19 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours





Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 19, 2004 11:12 pm
Posts: 19122
Location: NE Indiana, USA (NTSC)
Even if we emulate an NES whose PPU generates component signals instead of emulating down to the level of NTSC composite or S-video signals, a lot of commercial and homebrew games such as Super C take advantage of the fact that the top and bottom are cut off so that they can hide the garbage when an attribute block is split across the top and bottom of the screen.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7235
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
I think myself that the goal of an emulator is to look as close than what it would look on a real TV, regardless of techical details. I think FCEUltra does it very well, much more well than Nintendulator. But Nintendulator has the feature to log instruction, that is very usefull (but it sometimes takes 200% of my computer's CPU time and then it will bug).

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2004 8:33 am
Posts: 3715
Location: Central Texas, USA
Quote:
I think myself that the goal of an emulator is to look as close than what it would look on a real TV, regardless of techical details.


Over time I've realized (the obvious fact) that people write emulators for different reasons; it's not just about trying to make-believe one's PC is a big NES console on its side and one's monitor actually a TV set. The goal of the author for his emulator is whatever his goal is (the emulator itself has no goal, being non-sentient). Some write theirs in different languages, or try to implement unique features, or just enjoy the process itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:31 am
Posts: 418
Bregalad wrote:
I think myself that the goal of an emulator is to look as close than what it would look on a real TV, regardless of techical details. I think FCEUltra does it very well, much more well than Nintendulator. But Nintendulator has the feature to log instruction, that is very usefull (but it sometimes takes 200% of my computer's CPU time and then it will bug).


But there are games that Nintendulator has no problem emulating, yet make FCEUltra fall flat on its face. Nintendulator is all about low-level CPU, PPU, and APU accuracy. It could be, hands down, the end all be all of NES emulators if more work was done on usability improvements and polish for the end-gamer... that and ports to other platforms. Its slowness is becoming a thing of the past, with the progression of computer hardware. My point is that I wish more emulator authors started basing their emulators ontop of Nintendulator.

However, currently, my most used NES emulator is FCEUltra on the Xbox. I wish more emulators were ported to the Xbox... or at least a more recent port of FCEUltra :) Because of the hardware acceleration, you can tweak FCEUltra/Xbox to get the overscan perfect. I did the side-by-side comparison with a real NES on a real TV. FCEUltra/Xbox's output was blurrier than the real NES, but otherwise was fairly close to the real thing. Of course, peripherial comparison was wildly different. NES games are meant to be played with a real D-pad, not the crap pawned off on people these days. Hell, even Nintendo has botched up their D-pad on the Gamecube, GBASP, and NDS. Oh well.

Anyway, for my FCEUltra/Xbox gets more gameplay-time because of the usability stuff that goes ontop of a solid emulator core. IMO, there is nothing stopping Nintendulator from having this, assuming somebody wanted to spend the time.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 2:49 pm
Posts: 7235
Location: Chexbres, VD, Switzerland
Nintendulator is really great for accuracy and has the log feature, but it screen render is really bad for my viewpoint. FCEU is nearly as accurate than Nintendulator, and has the debugger, and very nice rendered graphics, and is pretty slow, but nintenulator is even much more slower.
Virtua NES render also very good graphics, but has some problem while toggling $2006 midframe (not always emulated correctly) and while toggling $2001 midscanline, and emulates PAL very badly. It is not very accurate, but enough for most licenced NTSC games. I has a lot of other function, such as Name Table viewer (that Nintendulator also has, but it slows the thing down a lot). And VirtuaNES is pretty fast, and cause no problem running evin on my old slow PC, while Nintendulator runs even too slow on my new fast PC.
I think the XBost is one of the worst gaming machines out there, and should not be used at all, even to use it to play old games.

_________________
Life is complex: it has both real and imaginary components.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group