[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 183 KB, 800x480, PlayStation.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
1141087 No.1141087 [DELETED]  [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

There seems to be a lot of hate for epsxe on the emulator scene. I've been using it and it's perfectly serviceable. If there's a reason to use any other let me know, because I wouldn't mind having a better emulating experience. Just right now, I don't see anything wrong.

>> No.1141093

Closed source and somewhat-active development.

PCSX-R (svn) is open source and very active. For example, it had multi-track cue sheet support for about three years before epsxe it.


>> No.1141103

blah blah blah blah personal preference blah blah blah

>> No.1141174

Only freetards who fap to stallman think that epsxe is not good.

>> No.1141285

I like how it runs even on a Pentium 3 PC.

And that's pretty much its only advantage.

>> No.1141490

It works sure, but PCSX-R does PSX emulation better. Try Twisted Metal 2 under both. epsxe won't emulate the intro properly, and all level transitions just don't load. PCSX-R does both right.

I used to use JNES for NES emulation, but after seeing how much better PuNES is at NES emulation with games like Kirby Adventure I can't go back to JNES.

Accuracy doesn't mean much until you have a chance to try something more accurate. Give it a go.

>> No.1144484

More like people who are educated about emulation.

Closed source emulators are never a good thing, that means that any knowledge about how the system works is not being shared and is being hoarded by a few people for personal or monetary gain, so it's useless from a preservation standpoint.

>> No.1144486


You explained nothing.

This guy did >>1141490

>> No.1144505


>You explained nothing.

Uh what? I explained why closed source is bad for the emulation scene.

>> No.1144510

You didn't explain why the emulator itself was bad, whereas the other anon did. That's what this thread is about.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.