Forum - View topicPhysical Emulators vs. Software Emulators: RetroN 5 vs RetroArch
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dessa
 Posts: 4438 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
NOTE: This thread is to be purely discussing the case presented, and the legal (and possibly moral) standing of the products in question. It is not to involve where to get said products, or the ROMs to use software emulators.
For reference source (Joystiq) Terms defined: Emulator: A piece of hardware and/or software designed to act as another piece of hardware and/or software. In this case, (a) video game system(s) Physical Emulator: Specifically, in this case, the RetroN 5, any emulator that is a physical device requiring physical copies of games to play. Software Emulator: A computer program that allows you to play games on your computer. Some require physical copies of games, others allow (or require) use of ROMs. ROM: A file that contains the coding for a game, which allows you to play the game without actually having the game (or on a system which is not compatible with the game's format, like a cartridge game on a computer). Patch: A file that updates/changes a program. In this case, a file that will change coding in the game. Usually these are to translate a Japanese game, correct (and/or change) the translation on an English game, or to fix bugs in the game. So, the Retron 5. I have a lot of friends online who have one, and swear up and down by how awesome it is. It'll play Famicom, NES, Super Famicom, SNES, Master Drive, Genesis, Game Boy, Game Boy Color, and Game Boy Advance games, all on one system. I'm pretty sure it won't play ROMs, but you can install patches, so if you have Japanese games, you can play them in English, or play "fixed" versions of badly translated English games. Apparently, however, it uses coding from software emulators (specifically the article names the Genesis Plus GX, SNES9x Next, FCEUmm, and VBA Next). Now, as a note, unless the emulator is stealing code, software emulators are not illegal. If they get around security functions, they could be, but in and of themselves, they're not. ROMs, on the other hand, are, which is why most emulator sites won't even point you to where to find them. For example, I've been toying around with PCXS2, which is a PS2 emulator. It does not play ROMs (to my knowledge, at least), and you have to have a copy of your PS2's BIOS to make it work (BIOS not included, since that is copyrighted, and you have to get that for yourself). I'm playing with it, for the same reason some people get the RetroN 5: patching them to play differently. In my case, I want to try out the Xenosaga undub, which is a patch that lets you play the English Xenosaga Episode I, but with the Japanese voices (Hoshi Souichiro, voice of chaos, is my favorite seiyuu ever). Now, while most gaming companies don't exactly look favorably on emulator makers (I remember, back in the day, when there was a PS1 emulator sold commercially, and Sony tried suing them. Don't remember who won, though), as I pointed out, the coding usually isn't illegal, and is often protected under various statues and licenses. Which these emulators are (see the article, it goes into legalese that is beyond me). So if the RetroN 5 is using their coding, violating all of the licenses listed in the article, it could go to court, which will be an interesting look into the legalities of emulators, and what the game companies are going to do in reaction. What do you guys think? I threw up a poll for the situation in general, but please still comment on this specific case. For me, if the RetroN 5 is using stolen code, then they're in the wrong. The emulator makers aren't exactly "innocent", but if they've followed correct procedure to get the right licenses for their code, then they're in the right. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
HereforUpdates
Posts: 12 Location: Florida |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is tough (as in the poll, not the discussion). I could pick the top 3 and give a reason for each of them. As for your quote
I also agree, but I don't dislike emulator makers making their own software to play the game if they're not using stolen code. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Fluwm
 Posts: 1091 |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The term that most needs to be defined here is "appropriate."
Assuming you mean something along the lines of, "which method of emulation has the most merit/value," I have to go with pure software emulation of roms/isos, for the simple fact that hardware degrades -- sometimes rapidly. Cartridge-based games will start to fail after a decade or so; disc-based games will deterioriate even faster, as they'll scratch themselves up over time due to (unavoidable) microvibrations. The only video game format that's relatively resilient here is the blu-ray disc... which runs into the problem of most BRD games being incomplete -- you're not gonna find any DLC or patchdata on those discs. But in terms of faithfully replicating the original experience... I think it depends on the platform. In most cases, software emulation + original controller (or a replica of the original controller) is ideal. But that's not always the case. Nintendo's software emulators for the WiiU and NSO, for example, have a lot of issues, especially with N64 games. In terms of legality, they're all pretty iffy. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group