What have you in mind to do with OCM ?

Page 6/19
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9892)

wolf_'s picture

10-12-2006, 13:42

I actually think a lot of people don't like that idea of really new MSX systems. I do tho. A lot of people who strongly disagree with the OCM do it because they compare the price of this OCM with the price of any ordinary MSX2 (with some extra extentions) on Ebay, or perhaps they compare it with their current MSX, which might be just a very enhanced set. Naturally the reprogrammability of the machine was communicated often enough.
So, it might be that a number of people are left behind once the OCM really changes drastically. In a way you'll get discussions about "this is no MSX anymore" etc.

By syntax_error

Resident (51)

syntax_error's picture

10-12-2006, 13:50

GEM runs on MSX2 and above, but is alsooptimized for MSX turboR. GEM emulates the classic Gameboy with remarkable accuracy and speed. Will it do also with the speed of the onechip msx? also in color gameboy...?

By Latok

msx guru (3836)

Latok's picture

10-12-2006, 13:56

I'm very worried the MSX evolution will be some kind of Wild West....There is a STRONG NEED for development structure. I haven't read that much about this important part of the future. We need MSX Software Team (MST) MKII Smile

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5984)

mars2000you's picture

10-12-2006, 14:25

Ehmmm ... Latok, you are no more part of the MRC team ????

By Latok

msx guru (3836)

Latok's picture

10-12-2006, 14:38

Correct Smile For some time already, actually. I was very inactive for the last year or so. And I believe that the MRC team does not benefit from inactive members. That's why I felt it was time for me to take this step back.

Back to the subject, I feel MSX evolution NEEDS to be structured. I understood Bazix wants to release 'official updates' but which updates are official?

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9892)

wolf_'s picture

10-12-2006, 14:52

Custom OCM code could be supplied with some demo or game, and then restored upon quit. Or: before some demo/game starts the current config is stored to some file, so in case of a sudden reset one can always manually restore the original state. But it's exactly this kinda customness that might scare off some people.

A dedicated MST could be an option, but *only* if this team knows what it's doing and not trying to artificially keep things low-profile or too hardwired. It's not a bad idea to look and think outside the box.

By Latok

msx guru (3836)

Latok's picture

10-12-2006, 18:29

Personally, I like computers such as classical 80s homecomputers and modern game consoles and handhelds because they have fixed hardware. I don't fancy the PC-dogma: 'Oh, it doesn't work smoothly? Just plug in some more memory or insert a faster GFX card....' That's the reason -in my view- why pc's don't have personality (computers with personality...Laaatok, shuuuut up ^_^). Thus I really hope the MSX scene will seriously start building an MSX3 standard, instead of customly adjusting the MSX hardware in benefit of a specific game of demo or utility. That won't lead to anything structural. And that will certainly spark fire to the view that the OCM actually is NOT an MSX.

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9892)

wolf_'s picture

10-12-2006, 19:28

Question is: "what" is an MSX, seen from today's perspective?

CPU:

I think, the CPU itself didn't define most of the MSX that much.

Sound:

The MSX has always had a lot of sound extensions, while other systems stayed with their standard chip. Therefor, chiptunes aren't realy common on MSX, and PSG music (in Konami style so to say, not the PT3 style) isn't made that much. What was *the* soundchip on MSX apart from the PSG? I'd say the FM-Pac. Question is, should we stick to the FM-Pac? Can't we expand its possibilities, for we'd loose MSX'ness?

Video:

Is it the slow-as-sh*t V9938? If so, are the MSX gfx slow by definition then? If so, is a fast video solution not in the spirit of MSX perhaps?

You also have to see all these things from the perspective of the 80's. Things made back then weren't made for specific goals probably, but just to fit a certain amount of features for a certain price per chip. I don't believe Yamaha could have predicted a demo like Unknown Reality.. Smile

Tell me Latok: what do you think of the G9k? Is it MSX'ness? If yes, what more functionality could we agree on to still be MSX'ness?
What do you think of the Moonsound? Is it MSX'ness? If yes, what more functionality could we afgree on to still be MSX'ness?

What do you think of the speed of a tR, let alone a tR running at 40Mhz (some ppl replaced their crystal)? Is it still an MSX? If yes, what would be the maximum speed that could fit the idea of an MSX?

By wolf_

Ambassador_ (9892)

wolf_'s picture

10-12-2006, 19:30

My point is: if a new standard is vast enough, ppl don't need to insert their own VHDL. The problem is: how sure can one be that one universal MSX3 design matches everyone's wishes?

By mars2000you

Enlighted (5984)

mars2000you's picture

10-12-2006, 20:17

You can take the problem from another angle : if the OCM is an hardware emulator of the MSX2 system with some improvements, than openMSX and blueMSX are the best software emulators and are actually the MSX3, with (almost) all the video/sound chips for MSX and with extra features (save states, video captures, trainer, debugger, audio captures, screenshots, renderers, audio mixer, ...).

Besides that, blueMSX is a MSX3+, because it supports also systems that are very close to MSX (SVI, Coleco, Sega). A living proof of that ? See the projects of opcode !!!!

Page 6/19
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11