Again i see that people think about msx generations as different architectures, (different computers, like zx spactrum, amstrad cpc, commodore c64) instead of the same that evolved.

this generate a kind of 'rivality' between owners or estimators of specific generation.
MSXDEV expresses this thought, by limiting the specs only on msx1

I think they are quite different although MSX2 is almost 100% backwards compatible, but it doesn't help me much to play MSX2 games on my CX5M

For me the rules of MSXDEV is pretty good, because I can just load the games on a flash cart and play them on my old Yamaha I don't think it would be that bad to increase the amount of ROM to say 512kB, because most flash carts seem to support it, but I hope the specs are kept to make games playable on MSX1 computers.

I don't see that its any rivality actually, but I absolutely see that people have different areas of interest, some prefer the MSX1 system, some MSX2 and some TR. There are people that enjoy working with or using extensions, like GFX9000, MP3 etc. I don't think you can expect everyone to be involved in everything, but at least I think its nice to read about and keep up to date with what people are doing although I'm only active in a some MSX activities.

well, I would say 2+, turboR would fall into the exclusive category, it had to be imported from Japan after all.
The msx2 on the other hand is pretty standard, and not just limited to Japan.
As for the gfx9k and Moonsound, well they're luxury add ons made by the scene itself and not part of the msx
standard (well, the 9k maybe as the proposed msx 3 gfx chip that never made it)

Quote:

I don't see that its any rivality actually, but I absolutely see that people have different areas of interest, some prefer the MSX1 system, some MSX2 and some TR.

The term rivality is in my previous post quoted. Does not mean the pure meaning of the word, of course.

But IMHO there is no point to keep specs to at msx1 level. The only result is to cut down the number of games developed.

There are games that could only be done on msx2+, are almost impossible to achieve on previous msx generations. It's best to have a xyz game only for msx2+ or not having at all?

Please note that the games actually available on msx1 are there BECAUSE there is MSXDEV. Without MSXDEV no games.


Having the competition open to newer generation stimulate the interest to compete.Otherwise no one start to think about the possibility to create a game if it's not possible to make on msx1.

Quote:

Having the competition open to newer generation stimulate the interest to compete.

As mentioned before there are other contests with other specs, for example the passionmsx contest. Honestly I'm not at all interested in seeing MSX2 games in MSXDEV. I really enjoy to have at least one competition dedicated to the system I love, namely MSX1. Pretty much all other competitions out there are for MSX2 or higher so there is something for everyone...

Quote:

this generate a kind of 'rivality' between owners or estimators of specific generation. MSXDEV expresses this thought, by limiting the specs only on msx1

Must disagree 100%. The MSXdev contests were born to expand the non-existant MSX activity, not trying to drop down the amount MSX2 productions but to obtain more MSX games out there, as back then, homebrew production was focused on MSX2 or higher.

If MSX2 developers activity felt down a bit, I think it has not been caused by the MSXdev contests, as lots of MRC Challenges and other newer contests (as Passion one's) were available for those wanting to compete into higher specs contests. So, don't blame the MSXdev but the MSX2 developers themselves for the lack of MSX2 developments.

Quote:

Well, pity msx 2's weren't so widespread elsewhere as here in Holland. our nostalgia vs. the rest

That´s right! MSX2 is your (and some japanese people) nostalgia.

People miss more badly the things which they used to have when they were children than things which they never had.

Indeed, I tried to get MSX2 in 1980s Finland, but didn´t succeed.

So, must say that it´s not a pity anymore, that MSX2s weren´t widespread around the world, we are just used to use and love MSX1. That´s why many people don´t miss MSX2 so badly that they should buy one. My first computer was Toshiba HX-10 MSX(1). And second was Commodore Amiga 500. And even if I could have managed to get MSX2 in the eighties, it would be sure, that I should have wanted Amiga 500 to replace MSX2, as even if I had had MSX2, there were only few MSX2 games sold in Finland (for a very short period, I remember only ONE msx games catalog where FEW MSX2 games were listed ONCE), and no one would buy MSX2 games, as no one had MSX2. I understand now, that MSX2 was (nearly) Amiga 500 like when comparing best looking games, or at least Atari ST, when thinking samelike sound chip but who games player needs machine, which had (almost) no games? Or even better, who needs machine which wasn´t sold at all!

Should I call MSX2 as commercial failure?

That´s why my nostalgia is MSX(1).


Imagine if MSX2 were NOT sold in 1980s Holland, you just had to stick with your MSX1s and love it´s best games, imagine such situation and tell me how many of you would REALLY miss MSX2 that much, machine which you had NEVER seen in REAL LIFE, maybe just in picture in some computer magazine?

Quote:

[...] And even if I could have managed to get MSX2 in the eighties, it would be sure, that I should have wanted Amiga 500 to replace MSX2, as even if I had had MSX2, there were only few MSX2 games sold in Finland (for a very short period, I remember only ONE msx games catalog where FEW MSX2 games were listed ONCE)

The same thing happened here in Italy. As far as I can remember, the only widespread MSX2 machines available here were the Philips NMS family of computers and with a really bad timing: that MSX2 machines went on sale when the Commodore Amiga was beginning to became a popular computer...

I live in Venice, and here we are used to see a lot of people that come here to wed, and for this reason there are a lot of photographers that also makes videos of these weddings. I knew some pros here that choosed a Philips NMS8280 instead of the Amiga because back in that days that MSX2 computer was an affordable desktop-video machine that allowed people to make video editing without having to spend a lot of money; But it lasted just one year, because with the introduction of the "Video Toaster" interface and "Scala" for the Amiga, nobody was caring anymore about the MSX2.

Too little, too late (at least here for the Italian audience).


On the other side, the MSX1 standard was quite popular. Not as popular as the "mighty" Commodore 64 (every kid that I used to know in the eighties had one or dreamed about having one) but IMHO it was in second place along with the ZX Spectrum here.

Quote:

If MSX2 developers activity felt down a bit, I think it has not been caused by the MSXdev contests, as lots of MRC Challenges and other newer contests (as Passion one's) were available for those wanting to compete into higher specs contests. So, don't blame the MSXdev but the MSX2 developers themselves for the lack of MSX2 developments.

Unless, of course, the MSX2 developers only have time for one game a year and choose MSXdev, perhaps not because they really like MSX1 more than MSX2, but because they may like the yearly contest and all the surrounding hooplah more.

Speaking from personal experience: I've had quite some concepts laying around here: we have a G9k for the relevant games, we had new 4Motion ideas, Polka 2, etc. And all these got delayed (or canceled?) due us joining MSXdev each time..

wolf_ there will be a new game like this year?

we'll see about that..

Quote:

Quote: If MSX2 developers activity felt down a bit, I think it has not been caused by the MSXdev contests, as lots of MRC Challenges and other newer contests (as Passion one's) were available for those wanting to compete into higher specs contests. So, don't blame the MSXdev but the MSX2 developers themselves for the lack of MSX2 developments. Unless, of course, the MSX2 developers only have time for one game a year and choose MSXdev, perhaps not because they really like MSX1 more than MSX2, but because they may like the yearly contest and all the surrounding hooplah more. Speaking from personal experience: I've had quite some concepts laying around here: we have a G9k for the relevant games, we had new 4Motion ideas, Polka 2, etc. And all these got delayed (or canceled?) due us joining MSXdev each time..

Bingo! someone see the point.

The key point is only one.

A lot of games are impossible to achieve on a msx1 decently. Period. this lead to one of:
1) If a developer aims to make a xyz game and participate on msxdev he have no choice. The result is that he does not start to think about how to realize it.
2) In the more optimistic scenario, the developer starts to make the project pushing the msx1 to 100% of the capabilities, then when the project progress, he find no more room to achieve the desired results. the game barely is aborted and does not see the light. Sometimes happen that the game stay to a concept level or a tech demo.


The problem is that a game is more complex to make than a concept or a tech demo, the latter is focused only on a specific aspect to optimize, instead a game had to be optimized in every aspect. Often there is no room, especially on msx1.


If the developer started on a little more powerfull generation, he should not have to face with soo much limits, so probably the game could be finished.

It would be nice if MSX2 developers would consider joining the passionmsx contest. MSXDEV shouldn't be a big factor that prevents it. Personally I'm not that interested atm in dedicating a lot of time to MSX2 development, but things can change, for example I'm working on a big ColecoVision project now and I didn't see that coming two years ago So I should never say never

Quote:

Should I call MSX2 as commercial failure?

To be honest the MSX is a commercial failure. And the reason is obvius: the crappy gfx capabilities of msx1.

Imagine a world where the standard started with a msx2/2+. Most probably the msx could be a significative 8 bit machine in that era.

the problem is that the failure of msx have it's roots in msx1. What count is the beginning. And msx beginning was not so good.

From msx2 era to TR era there that could change the msx destiny. The compatibility with the old gen was the problem.

Quote:

the problem is that the failure of msx have it's roots in msx1

Without throwing too much crap, I think MSX2 is the big failure. A lot of people around Europe had MSX1's, but when it was time to upgrade almost everyone went for better solutions, such as Atari ST or Commodore Amiga. MSX2 was simply an inferior system when it was released.