> > 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.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: MAME 0.192
Reply
