Gameboy Emulator

Actually, Sony sued because both of the rights on the design of various PSX chips (Emotion Engine, etc) and the commercialization of it. If Nintendo used a custom, own chip for a console, they would too. It's not that they hate their fanbase, that's just... stupid.

They do though, I've never once seen a Japanese company treat its fanbase just like an American company does until I saw Sony and it's 2nd party game developers. It's insistence on not allowing cross platform no matter what, hiding when there's been obvious security breaches until like 6 months later, going the way of XBox Live Gold... Sony is pretty bad.

Actually, Sony sued because both of the rights on the design of various PSX chips (Emotion Engine, etc) and the commercialization of it. If Nintendo used a custom, own chip for a console, they would too. It's not that they hate their fanbase, that's just... stupid.

The commercialization really didn't have much of an effect, even though it was used in court. Besides that, Nintendo DID use multiple custom chips for their consoles. The N64 had a unique SGI chip known as the RCP, the Gameboy had a unique type of Z80, the DS had ARM processors which you get to license the schematics for and then modify for your needs, the SNES had a Sony chip specifically designed for the Super Famicom supporting its audio AND a custom Ricoh 5A22(as far as I know, the SNES is the only electronic ever to use the 5A22,) the list goes on! Your excuse is flawed at best and horribly misguided at worst!

To (hopefully) end this argument... Emulators are legal. Emulators are legal. Emulators are legal. Nintendo never says they aren't legal, they emphasize that ROMs aren't legal. To be fair to people who believe emulators are illegal, the way Nintendo words their statements makes it sound like emulators are illegal. To confirm, however, emulators are NOT illegal unless they contain copyrighted material, which most do not.

Cool, thanks. The wording still suggests they don't like emulators though. And, again, copyrighted hardware. See above.

The wording still suggests they don't like emulators though. And, again, copyrighted hardware. See above.

Of course, lol. That's definitely a given with their views on ROMs. The reason why I mentioned Nintendo's statements is because it seems like they're trying to brainwash anyone thinking about using an emulator to think that they're extremely illegal products that should be avoided at all times. This is clearly not true. ROMs are of course an exception, but I don't think they're as big of a deal as how Nintendo describes them. For anyone who still hates emulators, I encourage you to watch this video: https://youtu.be/f35i5AVzpsg

Posted 16 seconds ago Edited 5 seconds ago by HTV04 YEETAS

HTV04:Glad we are at an understanding here. random_god:Christ, congratulations on 1K posts my man.

Before dropping this subject and going back on topic, I just wanted to point something out in Nintendo's statements. ROM ripping devices? Yeah, they're not illegal, regardless of what Nintendo's saying. Nintendo points out that ROM ripping devices are illegal based on their "purpose," which according to them, is to extract a ROM and optionally upload it online. The uploading online part is indeed illegal, but extracting a ROM isn't, for the most part. Notice how Nintendo is mentioning that uploading ROMs is a part of the device's "purpose." Their purpose is in no way defined. In the description of these products, they're not saying, "Hey, upload whatever ROMs you extract with this device!" That's like calling computers illegal because you can upload said ROMs to a page. They are definitely trying to brainwash people with these statements. They're misleading. I feel like they should be more honest with the subject, "from a business sense." I mean, think about it. The imaginary person asking about ROM ripping devices in the Q&A is most likely thinking about getting such a device for personal use. Yet Nintendo's statement is addressing this question as if they directly asked "can I upload them too?" Perhaps there is a legal gray area with extracting ROMs. The way they address emulation is still extremely exaggerated. Should I mention that they're also hypocrites? They use the same iNES header format most emulators use for their products. Sure, they could argue "well, it's our games, as well as games we licensed," but that's not the point. They used something that the emulation community created, and the iNES format wouldn't exist if unofficial emulation didn't exist. Nintendo could have created their own format, but for simplicity, they chose to use the popular iNES format created by fans. They should definitely be less harsh towards the emulation community, especially since they're using resources from it (possibly in their "official" emulators too by using resources from unofficial emulators for reference).

Honestly, that last part gets to me. It makes me think that they're not even ripping their own ROMs, but instead are getting them from illegal websites.

Honestly, that last part gets to me. It makes me think that they're not even ripping their own ROMs, but instead are getting them from illegal websites.

I agree. While there's no direct evidence that they're doing this, the ROM data of several NES games from Virtual Console and the NES Classic matching up with their No-Intro checksums just by coincidence seems too good to be true.

random_god:Christ, congratulations on 1K posts my man.

Thanks Lets not get off topic here

Honestly, that last part gets to me. It makes me think that they're not even ripping their own ROMs, but instead are getting them from illegal websites.

I agree. While there's no direct evidence that they're doing this, the ROM data of several NES games from Virtual Console and the NES Classic matching up with their No-Intro checksums just by coincidence seems too good to be true.

A: I mean, they did put unreleased Starfox 2 on their SNES classic, which was available as a ROM online for awhile beforehand B: Techniquely it is their code, but still... C: This is starting to become more about emulators in general than GB emulator for SB. If you want to talk about emulators in general and companies and whatnot, I suggest you guys make an entirely new thread. _{D: I want that channel to upload more often.}

Honestly, that last part gets to me. It makes me think that they're not even ripping their own ROMs, but instead are getting them from illegal websites.

I agree. While there's no direct evidence that they're doing this, the ROM data of several NES games from Virtual Console and the NES Classic matching up with their No-Intro checksums just by coincidence seems too good to be true.

A: I mean, they did put unreleased Starfox 2 on their SNES classic, which was available as a ROM online for awhile beforehand B: Techniquely it is their code, but still... C: This is starting to become more about emulators in general than GB emulator for SB. If you want to talk about emulators in general and companies and whatnot, I suggest you guys make an entirely new thread. _{D: I want that channel to upload more often.}

Will do.

A: I mean, they did put unreleased Starfox 2 on their SNES classic, which was available as a ROM online for awhile beforehand

Except that's the completed version, which had stuff that was never apart of the final beta that we had a ROM for long before hand, so for all intents and purposes, that's the only ROM they seem to have not stolen.

A: I mean, they did put unreleased Starfox 2 on their SNES classic, which was available as a ROM online for awhile beforehand

Except that's the completed version, which had stuff that was never apart of the final beta that we had a ROM for long before hand, so for all intents and purposes, that's the only ROM they seem to have not stolen.

Oh, ok. Back to GB emulator on SB everyone. Let's talk about the technical mastery of the bit switching and whatnot.

The flipping bit? Hmm... Well, if there's a problem with a mystery bit, designing a debugger in the bottom screen configured to read out literally EVERY OPERATION that variable goes through might work. Not exactly easy though.

A: I mean, they did put unreleased Starfox 2 on their SNES classic, which was available as a ROM online for awhile beforehand

Except that's the completed version, which had stuff that was never apart of the final beta that we had a ROM for long before hand, so for all intents and purposes, that's the only ROM they seem to have not stolen.

Additionally, Nintendo seems to use their own format for SNES games, using .sfrom and .sfpcm files instead of the common .sfc format. Seems like they either put more effort with SNES games, or they used a different format to hide their possible piracy. Quick note that games that use the Super FX chip (Star Fox 1 & 2) are in the .sfc format. Back to topic. Post any further discussion on my emulation thread (too lazy to link rn).

The wording still suggests they don't like emulators though. And, again, copyrighted hardware. See above.

Of course, lol. That's definitely a given with their views on ROMs. The reason why I mentioned Nintendo's statements is because it seems like they're trying to brainwash anyone thinking about using an emulator to think that they're extremely illegal products that should be avoided at all times. This is clearly not true. ROMs are of course an exception, but I don't think they're as big of a deal as how Nintendo describes them. For anyone who still hates emulators, I encourage you to watch this video: https://youtu.be/f35i5AVzpsg

Truly inspiring. Without emulation, those games will be lost.

Any updates on releasing this to GitHub?

HTV04, if I had to hazard a guess, that'd be a no dog because they're probably taking a break.

Is there an emulator through Smilebasic that supports GBA games?

Is there an emulator through Smilebasic that supports GBA games?

Nope, and even if there was, it would be unplayable and run over 50x slower than real time, most likely.