Go Back   Project64 Forums > General Discussion > Open Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 17th August 2017, 01:33 PM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,239
Default

lol...owned.

RetroArch I'm sure isn't particularly impressed with anybody's N64 core, mupen or otherwise. Probably the only thing they know they want out of PJ64 into Mupen's core is the RSP hack to get those task-yielding games working in LLE.

While I was still more active in porting Project64 to Linux, Twinaphex was appreciative of that with respect to the option of eventually having a Project64 core for libretro.

That may have actually been before the more official efforts to port it to Android/Linux by zilmar, though, which means it must have been before the talk about a payed Android version and changes to revenue and profit methods, which is another regular political debate within RA about developers. On one hand, the payware concept turns them away from caring to see if it's ported, but on another, things got so bad with Dolphin that they had Dolphin ported to RetroArch out of spite.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 17th August 2017, 07:58 PM
RPGMaster's Avatar
RPGMaster RPGMaster is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,972
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by theboy181 View Post
If Pj's core is Win32 free, I can't see why they don't use a superior N64 like Pj instead.
retroarch devs want portability. They also want an x64 dynarec . I think they would become more interested if PJ64 has a mature x64 and ARM dynarec and also had a volunteer to help with porting. They also need dynarecs that support PIC. I think you're right that they aren't pleased with m64p.
Quote:
Originally Posted by squall_leonhart View Post
because pj64's core isn't better than mupens.
What lead you to change your mind ? I know that the gap have shrunken, but it still hasn't caught up in performance, compatibility, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 17th August 2017, 08:59 PM
loganmc10 loganmc10 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 5
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGMaster View Post
retroarch devs want portability. They also want an x64 dynarec . I think they would become more interested if PJ64 has a mature x64 and ARM dynarec and also had a volunteer to help with porting. They also need dynarecs that support PIC. I think you're right that they aren't pleased with m64p.
What lead you to change your mind ? I know that the gap have shrunken, but it still hasn't caught up in performance, compatibility, etc.
It's still more work than you might think, integrating input, audio, and graphics into libretro would be no small task. The input and audio bits would probably need to be written from scratch, and then comes the task of picking a graphics plugin and porting it over.

I actually agree that PJ64 probably performs better than mupen64plus, but it also makes the RDB a bit more of a mess, because each game reacts differently to the many "performance options" (I don't even know what they all do, but I see a lot of "32bit=No" "Linking=Off" "SMM = something" type things in the RDB). mupen64plus has a more "one size fits all" approach, which probably doesn't perform as well, but also doesn't require all the per-game tuning that PJ64 has.

As far as compatibility goes, I think you'd be really hard pressed today to find a game that was more compatible in PJ64. Besides maybe one or two that could use their CountPerOp settings tweaked or something.

I really doubt that libretro will go to the trouble of porting over PJ64, if you really objectively think about what they would gain by that move, it's not much. The only way it would happen is if someone was motivated out of spite or something, as was mentioned earlier.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 17th August 2017, 10:56 PM
RPGMaster's Avatar
RPGMaster RPGMaster is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,972
Default

Oh I know it wouldn't be trivial to port. Even writing an x64 dynarec + adding PIC support would require a significant amount of work.

I don't see why input, audio, or graphics would require much work though. I'm sure they could largely use existing code.

I'm not a big fan of the "one size fits all" approach. Nobody has ever come close to successfully achieving this across the board. Interestingly, quite a few games could be even faster on PJ64, if you do further tweaking to the settings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loganmc10 View Post
I really doubt that libretro will go to the trouble of porting over PJ64, if you really objectively think about what they would gain by that move, it's not much. The only way it would happen is if someone was motivated out of spite or something, as was mentioned earlier.
I completely disagree. For one, they care about performance. For instance, don't they have multiple forks of SNES-9X? If some of their concerns were met, like x64 dynarec, I think they would definitely be interested in porting PJ64. They are just shorthanded right now.

If there wasn't much to gain from switching to PJ64 from m64p, I'd have switched to m64p years ago. I could really use an x64 dynarec.

I don't think spite would have anything to do with their decision. The situation is pretty bad right now. They can no longer stay upstream with their m64p core. If they had volunteers, switching to PJ64 would be a good move.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 18th August 2017, 07:51 AM
squall_leonhart's Avatar
squall_leonhart squall_leonhart is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 2,895
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RPGMaster View Post
retroarch devs want portability. They also want an x64 dynarec . I think they would become more interested if PJ64 has a mature x64 and ARM dynarec and also had a volunteer to help with porting. They also need dynarecs that support PIC. I think you're right that they aren't pleased with m64p.
What lead you to change your mind ? I know that the gap have shrunken, but it still hasn't caught up in performance, compatibility, etc.

the cores aren't comparable in how they achieve their goal.


neither is better than the other.
__________________
Xfire Profile | VBA-M | XBCD 0.2.7

CPU:Intel i7 920 @ 3.8(D0), Mainboard:Asus Rampage II Gene, Memory:12GB Corsair Vengeance 1600
Video:EVGA Geforce GTX 680+ 4GB, Sound:Creative XFI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro, Monitor:BenQ G2400WD
HDD:500GB Spinpoint F3, 1TB WD Black, 2TB WD Red, 1TB WD Black
Case:NZXT Guardian 921RB, PSU:Corsair 620HX, OS:Windows 7 SP1
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 1st September 2017, 08:26 PM
fery65 fery65 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 12
Default

Hello guy here I go again !! ,)

First I thank Zilmar for having answered my post !!

As I was telling you in this post guys, I think porting PJ64 to Linux it would be very good, a graet idea because now the future of emulation is in multiplatform console with multiplatform emulators. Indeed, all emulators in one like RetroArch does. And we need a good N64 emulator like PJ64.

There are so many good initiatives, specially by French developpers as Recalbox OS and Batocéra OS which are the best and which gather all emulators and cores in one OS. These OS work on Linux and ARM processors that is why I think PJ64 developpers should port in the future PJ64 in linux to be able to integrate PJ64 core in Libretro and so to be able to propose it in Recalbox or Batocéra OS.

I urge PJ64 to help Retrogaming community and OS developpers, to offer the best retrogaming experience ever. In a couple of years we should have something great I think.

Thanks

François
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 1st September 2017, 08:45 PM
fery65 fery65 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 12
Default

Hello guy here I go again !! ,)

First I thank Zilmar for having answered my post and obviously thanks to all the community !! We need Initiatives !!!

As I was telling you in this post guys, I think porting PJ64 to Linux it would be very good, a graet idea because now the future of emulation is in multiplatform console with multiplatform emulators. Indeed, all emulators in one like RetroArch does. And we need a good N64 emulator like PJ64.

There are so many good initiatives, specially by French developpers as Recalbox OS and Batocéra OS which are the best and which gather all emulators and cores in one OS. These OS work on Linux and ARM processors that is why I think PJ64 developpers should port in the future PJ64 in linux to be able to integrate PJ64 core in Libretro and so to be able to propose it in Recalbox or Batocéra OS.

I urge PJ64 to help Retrogaming community and OS developpers, to offer the best retrogaming experience ever. In a couple of years we should have something great I think.

Thanks

François
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 1st September 2017, 09:45 PM
theboy181's Avatar
theboy181 theboy181 is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Prince Rupert,British Columbia Canada
Posts: 418
Default

The future of Emulation is Linux? Why is that?

Anyway, I wont discourage someone for taking their time to port PJ64 to other OS's, but I would never expect zilmar or his team to actively do so. Focusing their time doing this, so someone else can make another core for RA (until it explodes) makes little sense to me.

Mupen64 is on Linux, and I have to say it just seemed to get worse when they took it in that direction. Until logan started making it more user friendly I had no place for it.

I hope PJ64 doesn't step backwards for OS compatibility sake. The topic of doing this port in a day, has me laughing too..
__________________
So you think you can TECH!! Watch this!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAUKPq5QjL0
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 2nd September 2017, 03:51 AM
HatCat's Avatar
HatCat HatCat is offline
Alpha Tester
Project Supporter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: In my hat.
Posts: 16,239
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theboy181 View Post
Mupen64 is on Linux, and I have to say it just seemed to get worse when they took it in that direction.
wtf?

So porting it to Windows made it worse or something?

Or are you under this backwards impression that Mupen64 was originally on Windows and ported to Linux later?

Quote:
Originally Posted by theboy181 View Post
Until logan started making it more user friendly I had no place for it.
The future of emulation is user-friendly interfaces? Why is that?
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 2nd September 2017, 04:19 AM
fery65 fery65 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 12
Default

Hi again

It is a shame that you think like that, even ery sad for someone who work in emulation to preserve retro games. I am not saying PJ64 has to be port to Linux, I said that of course in the title just to give an example that there a lot of OS, multiplaform console or emulators all in one which work well in Linux. There are a lot of initiatives very interesting for all retrogamers to gather all best emulators all in one platform as RetroArch, and I was explaining that the future is that, not linux, I said the future of emulation is to gather all emulators all in one in only one multiplatform. So it would be good to port PJ64 in RetroArch libretro as the future of emulatation is gathering best emulators in one platform.

Now why I said to port PJ64 to linux, because I think there are very interesting projects which are being developed for linux like Batocera OS and Recalbox OS which can be used as a frontend like Hyperspin, but in linux.

Of course windows has good frontend too like hyperspin, lauchbox etc but in general is not plug and play you have work hard to configure very well all emulators and the fontend, it is not as fluid, flowing as other linux os like Batocera or Recalbox. Like the most part of people who do not know how to configure to get a good emulator, these kind of OS project developed by french people not now there are also people from all over the world. It is open for everybody.

Indeed, these OS are using RetroArch emulators and all cores from libretro, it is very interesting because it is very easy to configure emulators, all options are in the same frontend (Recalbox or Batocera) you only have to push a button and that's it, very easy, very pleasant, plug and play, you can make your own mini console with the best emulators all in one. You have a lot of filters, shaders options. That is why I think this kind of projects are the future of emulation, it would be a shame that PJ64, for me the best N64 emulators is absent from this beautiful project.

I am not telling you YOU HAVE TO DO THAT, I am just suggesting you to do that. If PJ64 developpers do not want to do that, that's their own choice, nothing to do, but I think if we are working in an emulator, it is because we like retrogaming so we want to get the best part of it, and doing good projects gathering the best one, like PJ64 is, everybody wins.

Thank you, sorry for my english

François from France

Here's little video presentation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7bDGqJn31s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3T-t9RqU7w&t=1287s
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.