Quote: > > So the Mame Devs are interested in ripping machines that may not be arcade > machines, > > or arcade machines that might be still sold and relevantly new on a legacy > platform. > > Apparently you're unfamiliar (System16.com can educate you), but a majority of arcade > games made since about 1997 are on commodity console or PC hardware. That doesn't > make them not arcade games. Furthermore, this game was sold to arcade operators just > like any other game. So it's fair game for MAME. > > If the company wishes to protect a console version, they can contact us just as Cave > and Arika have in the past. (In Arika's case, they made more copies of the game than > Xbox 360s have ever sold in Japan, with predictable 2600 ET-like results, but MAMEdev > did remove the games as we were asked).
What ever happened to asking the companies first if their copyrighted works can be dumped and copied first? We are talking about a platform that is not required to be preserved. If the platform had some obscure CPU I would be more understanding. But this is not the case is it?
I think this suggestion about comparing grabbing legacy software from a Korean company is somehow linked to the virtue of preserving 80s arcade games is just weak.
It looks to me that, there is no ethical boundaries Mame cannot cross. I cannot believe that. What's next? Preserving some Half Life 2 mod in a PC with an unique controller because its in the same vein as HL2 Survivor?
There are so many games of the 80s out there that are still not captured (some I know are beyond some of you), and yet you are all vesting on this Bounty Hunter game?
Just ask them, I'm sure they would be appreciative of the gesture. They might help you too. Heck they might make some money out of a port after all.
If I am wrong about all of this, please show me some references to support your argument, right now I cannot understand dumping recent x86 software.