Emulator Comparison revisited? New set of tests required.

For emulations things such as savestates/loadstates and reverse are good to take on consideration.

Anyway just wait until the new openmsx will be released.

Multi-Plex stage 2 water is borked on all emulators

Following that, I suggest to scrap the rest of the nitpicky hard-to-determine emulation accuracy tests too, you'd need to be someone with a lot more expertise in the emulation field than the average snout to get a fair test result.

Overall, emu accuracy is terribly good, really.

Instead, compare them by user-experience and handy features (see Vampier above). Also, please present it as your personal opinion and not as a (factual) comparison approved by the whole MRC. (blueMSX bragging on several occasions that it came out as winner on the previous comparison still makes my eye twitch sometimes)

Instead, compare them by user-experience and handy features (see Vampier above). Also, please present it as your personal opinion and not as a (factual) comparison approved by the whole MRC. (blueMSX bragging on several occasions that it came out as winner on the previous comparison still makes my eye twitch sometimes)

BlueMSX rules with its debugger, Meisei rules with its graphical VRAM (sprite and tileset) viewer.

Bluemsx debugger needs a couple of essential features:
1) add/remove watch point for ram/vram variables. Now there is no way to observe changes in the ram while they happens or to to add breakpoits when they happens
2) allow the user to decide the allignment of code and data. Now if it starts disassembling data, it can continue for thousands of bytes before reallinging correctly to the actual code. Moreover any label in the middle of a(wrong) instruction disappears