MSX easier to emulate than C64?

Pagina 6/13
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

Van Sonic_aka_T

Enlighted (4130)

afbeelding van Sonic_aka_T

09-10-2006, 00:20

R800 @14Mhz+GFX9000+MoonSound
well thats a nice setup but really not MSX compatible. I really don't thing GFX9000 has anything to do with MSX although it fits in the cart slot.
I don't know what you have against the GFX9000, but I can assure you it's as MSX as a Moonsound, CF IDE, SCSI interface, FM-PAC or 'MSX-AUDIO'. None of these chipsets were made specifically for MSX. Heck, even the MSX1 'VDP' wasn't made for the MSX system. At some point someone decided they wanted to make an MSX addon with a chip, and they went ahead and made it. I don't see how any of those devices (minus the TMS maybe) is any different from the GFX9000. It's just another add-on, and as MSX as any of em...

Van Sonic_aka_T

Enlighted (4130)

afbeelding van Sonic_aka_T

09-10-2006, 00:24

If you are going to make such comparisations, pleas make them fair -> "standard" MSX models vs "standard" Amiga models, and the same for extended ones.Very true indeed, let's not forget the year in which (for instance) the A500 was released, and the level of total PWNness it introduced back then. I think it's one of the coolest systems ever designed, so naturally it 'failed'. Sad The crappiest system (or close to at least) ever designed was prolly the IBM PC, which explains how it became the 'world standard'..... *sigh* Shocked! oO Eek!

Van dvik

Prophet (2200)

afbeelding van dvik

09-10-2006, 07:49

@Sonic_aka_T: I’m not a big fan of gfx9000 mainly because it’s a device that is created after msx ‘died’ (at least commercially) and it drastically changes the characteristics from what the MSX system does. Other modern extensions, such has CF IDE, SCSI, megaram are different. They make it more convenient to work with your MSX, but the games are still looking the same as if they were loaded from diskettes or carts.

I don’t have anything against the gfx9000 technology itself and I enjoy watching the few applications that is using gfx9000. But I may be a bit conservative. I simply think it doesn’t belong on the MSX scene because it wasn’t part of the commercial MSX scene in the 80’s or early 90's. It doesn’t look and behave as the MSX VDP’s which I think is quite core part of the MSX systems.

Van Samor

Prophet (2106)

afbeelding van Samor

09-10-2006, 11:25

If you are going to make such comparisations, pleas make them fair -> "standard" MSX models vs "standard" Amiga models, and the same for extended ones.Very true indeed, let's not forget the year in which (for instance) the A500 was released, and the level of total PWNness it introduced back then. I think it's one of the coolest systems ever designed, so naturally it 'failed'. Sad The crappiest system (or close to at least) ever designed was prolly the IBM PC, which explains how it became the 'world standard'..... *sigh* Shocked! oO Eek!

I'm just amazed why we all still have those ridiculously big boxes on or under our desks. Surely with todays technology, that could all be a bit smaller? =P

Van jalu

Master (158)

afbeelding van jalu

09-10-2006, 11:37

But you shouldn't mind the fact that technically the Amiga is a better machine then the MSX.

I'd like to point out that, though having better capabilities, I have a really hard time calling the Amiga technically better than any MSX; I think the Amiga's design is technically actually quite worse than MSX, just look at all the incompatibilities between the different Amiga models and you know what I'm talking about.

An original Amiga was essentially a poor man's Mac with some added chips which made it a kick-ass gameconsole, but other than that it had very little advantages over other systems, while the complexity of it's architecture made it have some quite large disadvantages over other systems... Like the fact that some software worked perfectly fine on a single A500 and would only cause problem after problem on another A500, imagine the problems caused by using an A600 or an A1200 for running the same software. The few compatibility problems between different makes of MSX machines and between MSX1 and later machines really look only minor nuisances compared to the enormous amounts of compatibilityproblems between the different Amiga machines. Not even mentioning the notoriously instable AmigaOS versions of the Amiga models which were on sale during the MSX era. The AmigaOS only matured after the last turboR had been produced, and that was too little, too late, since Microsoft was already gaining market dominance with Windows 3.0.

Van msd

Paragon (1462)

afbeelding van msd

09-10-2006, 12:15

@divk: actually the v9990 is from the early years of the 90's. Made in 1991 Tongue. And even the example code in the v9990 manual is for z80.

Van AuroraMSX

Paragon (1902)

afbeelding van AuroraMSX

10-10-2006, 11:06

@Sonic_aka_T: I’m not a big fan of gfx9000 mainly because it’s a device that is created after msx ‘died’ (at least commercially) and it drastically changes the characteristics from what the MSX system does. Other modern extensions, such has CF IDE, SCSI, megaram are different. They make it more convenient to work with your MSX, but the games are still looking the same as if they were loaded from diskettes or carts.

I don’t have anything against the gfx9000 technology itself and I enjoy watching the few applications that is using gfx9000. But I may be a bit conservative. I simply think it doesn’t belong on the MSX scene because it wasn’t part of the commercial MSX scene in the 80’s or early 90's. It doesn’t look and behave as the MSX VDP’s which I think is quite core part of the MSX systems.

Then I guess you hold the same grudge against the MoonSound. Every argument you state here also holds for that device Smile

Van Samor

Prophet (2106)

afbeelding van Samor

10-10-2006, 11:27

Ah, I just remembered why I don't have a MoonSound.
I used to think the MoonSound was compatible with MSX Music and MSX Audio. When I found out it wasn't, it seemed a bit useless to me... there are some demos/games using it which admittedly sound awesome, but I think the device is very much limited to the Dutch Turbo-R owning community (who usually also have an IDE device, Slotexpander and maybe a GFX9000) Wink
Oh, the Turbo-R...awesome MSX, truly; I'd get one if it weren't for the high prices they go by, but it doesn't offer much over a 2+ with an adequate amount of memory, though (and a 2+ is only a small improvement over the MSX2 in itself). Oh yes, I know, TECHNICALLY the Turbo-R does, but how many commercial titles ever used that? if it's more than 10, it's more than I ever knew about.
Of course, now that there's BlueMSX and OpenMSX, everyone could enjoy it, but, before that, how many people were actually able to run Moonsound demo's for a TR? Not THAT many.... let alone GFX9000 related programs, which is even a smaller group.

Van wolf_

Ambassador_ (9906)

afbeelding van wolf_

10-10-2006, 11:43

But a Moonsound is not limited to tR users only.. most Moonsound stuff, perhaps even ALL Moonsound stuf, works on MSX2 Tongue

Van Samor

Prophet (2106)

afbeelding van Samor

10-10-2006, 11:59

well, that's true. Yet, many people that use one seem to have a TR as well Wink
anyway, ALL MoonSound stuff...how much is that? And how many people have a MoonSound?
...and how many people outside of the Netherlands have one? Tongue

Pagina 6/13
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11