> And the point I want to make is that for the popular consoles > (NES/SNES/Genesis/GB/GBA) "much better" greatly overstates the user-visible > difference when playing a large majority of games. We want people to try MESS, merge > or not - contrary to what you may have heard, a lot of the drivers run really well in > the common cases. It's not like it was in 2006 or even 2008.
I think that MESS/MESS Team should find a way to make clear what it's really good at, understanding by this that it would run well (not necessarily perfect) anything common that anyone could try. This way users know what expectations to have from the emulator. Today, as a user I don't really know what to expect from each driver, or "what is MESS good at". If many users knew that they can use MESS exclusively for say NES emulation, Genesis, or whatever, they would start using it as their emulator for said platform instead of having it on the side as another emulator that I could, maybe, use.
I say this because I would really like to replace all my emulators by MESS, but even drivers that are not working perfectly well are not always marked as "not working", and you end up having problems. Maybe have s stricter policy to "clear" a driver of any "non working" flags. That way, we know if a driver is clear is because it will work, period. (I test mess once in a while, some of these things might have changed and I didn't notice)
This way it would be easier to have a list of drivers that work well. All I'm saying here is basically the way I approach MAME.
Index 
Flat 
Re: Probably a good time to see how far MESS has progressed
Reply
