> > those crap old chipsets are actually still very, very common, I still know a lot of > > people with 'junk' like that for their main PC, because for internet etc. they just > > use a smartphone. > > > > they typically end up finding that RetroArch works better on such hardware and > > ditching proper MAME for good unfortunately. > > Prove to me, with photos and screenshots, that RetroArch will run on PCs that have > video hardware which doesn't even support non-power-of-two textures, and I will > revise (but not recant) all of the following. Having said that: > > You consistently rail against the universe for people turning to RetroArch, yet > you're now also railing against even the slightest change that involves bringing > MAME's rendering pipeline into this century, which - if implemented simultaneously > with a UI overhaul, and the planned support for things like 3D art assets in layouts > - could actually stand half a chance at clawing back some of those users. Can you > please clarify your standpoint such that, to me at least, you don't sound like a > hypocrite who, typically, abounds with criticism for what everyone else is doing > while being convinced that his own feces is without scent? > > I mean, really, Haze. You're choosing this thread - this thread, of all of them - to > moan about how MAME devs are driving people towards RetroArch? Can you point out > which emulator it is that could make Hyperstone games run full speed on Diet Go Go > Fan's machine? Because from where I'm sitting, there aren't any. And if he (or she, > what do I know) happens to switch to RetroArch, then he will effectively be using an > older version of MAME, which is slower, because this is a thread in which we're > discussing my optimizations that made a driver faster in this version of MAME, you > implacable knob.
I'm reluctantly suggesting he try RA, because I've heard success stories for cases where MAME no longer works, you're reading far too much into what I said.
|