> 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.
|
Index 
Flat 
Re: MAME 0.192
Reply
