Is the One Chip MSX a real MSX or not?

Page 5/13
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10

Par Latok

msx guru (3861)

Portrait de Latok

10-02-2007, 19:49

True, MSXA did listen to the scene. The current config is a lot better than the previous one. Admitted. But they must continue doing so.

What should we actually do then? There would be confusion, a lot of discussions and an even more divided scene. So then we should just boot a 1984 MSX machine and have fun with Roadfighter. Definitely.

Par wolf_

Ambassador_ (9918)

Portrait de wolf_

10-02-2007, 19:56

Not really a divided scene I think.. only a division between a unified scene and Japan, which is actually all we've been living with since the scene ever began.

So, I see 2 issues which cry for answers:
- how does MSXA see the future of the OCM? As a small-format MSX-machine for retrogames and not more?
- what does (the/a) JP scene look like? Are they like our scene? Fiddling around with scary screensplits and other unconventional stuff?

Only if we know these 2 answers we can estimate whether our scene is "entitled" to act as authority?

Par dvik

Prophet (2200)

Portrait de dvik

10-02-2007, 20:02

I think you are drifting off topic wolf_ and Latok. Interesting discussion though.

Par wolf_

Ambassador_ (9918)

Portrait de wolf_

10-02-2007, 20:05

That's life .. in life a discussion always drifts away Tongue

Par dvik

Prophet (2200)

Portrait de dvik

10-02-2007, 20:12

absolutely. Thats what's makes discussions interesting.

Par Latok

msx guru (3861)

Portrait de Latok

10-02-2007, 20:28

dvik, I think we can not get MORE on topic. To summarize my thread contributions and answer the topics title question: yes, it is an MSX. Why? Because MSX Association says so. Do we want to use this MSX? For me, the answer to this question is: no, not in its current form. It's inferior to my turboR. And it also lacks essential MSX2 specifications. With VHDL updates which are not authorised by MSX Association, the device loses its specific identity and you can't qualify the device as an MSX anymore. In short, the device is an MSX as long as MSX Association says it is. And they can change this MSX-specification with VHDL-updates. Smart move.

Par wolf_

Ambassador_ (9918)

Portrait de wolf_

10-02-2007, 20:36

So, MSXA is the authority here. And the scene has no authority (be it a creative one instead of an official authority) ?

Actually I think any person or organisation can demand authority (the concept of mutiny Smile ). Not that I'm such a pirate orso, but authority has to be earnt.

Actually, Tok, do you think the Moonsound and G9k are genuine 'MSX' things? If yes: do you see Sunrise as an authority? And what about Dumas?

Par wolf_

Ambassador_ (9918)

Portrait de wolf_

10-02-2007, 20:41

Actually, I think we can ditch this issue by addressing another question:

Would you accept developers releasing products including their own VHDL, and restoring the old state upon quit?

If yes: then the above discussion about 'scene vs MSXA' is zippo.

Par Latok

msx guru (3861)

Portrait de Latok

10-02-2007, 20:42

They are MSX add-ons. With an MSX machine as basis. Authorised MSX machine.

I'm going to release Playstation4 next week. Awesome.

Par Latok

msx guru (3861)

Portrait de Latok

10-02-2007, 20:43

Actually, I think we can ditch this issue by addressing another question:

Would you accept developers releasing products including their own VHDL, and restoring the old state upon quit?

If yes: then the above discussion about 'scene vs MSXA' is zippo.yes Tongue

Page 5/13
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10