Main > Main Forum

Hardware 3D Acceleration In Mame

Pages: << < (4/20) > >>

BORIStheBLADE:

I'm with you on this one Fozz....
Mame needs to evolve with the hardware its running on. I can't see it bloating the Mame code.

Xiaou2:


 Not everybody is going to own the same Graphics card.   And more than likely, each card will vary in its
power and timings.    If thats the case...  then that could throw off the entire timing of the events.  While
it may not be a huge offshift - and probably not even noticeable to anyone...  the things is that it
IS different from the original hardware.    And that is why mame would not do it.

 However, if anyone is interested,  they are free to make their own emulators,  as many have.
Im sure if you are willing to put your money where your big mouth is,  you can buy a programmer
to do whatever your hearts desire.
 

Hurray Banana:


--- Quote from: pinballjim on February 22, 2008, 03:12:19 pm ---The reason you won't see proper 3D support in MAME anytime soon is because the coding is far beyond the capabilities of the MAME developers.  Anyone that can do it and has any interest in doing so has already contributed to other software.


--- End quote ---

I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, as setting up the core hardware emulation in mame is a more complex job than sorting out a rendering pipeline for the 3d games. I think quite a few of the devs would be capable. IMHO

ahofle:


--- Quote from: Hurray Banana on February 22, 2008, 03:36:55 pm ---I'm assuming you're being sarcastic, as setting up the core hardware emulation in mame is a more complex job than sorting out a rendering pipeline for the 3d games. I think quite a few of the devs would be capable. IMHO

--- End quote ---

He's just being a ---tallywhacker---, as his avatar indicates.  Reverse engineering encrypted roms is probably 100 times more difficult than 3D programming..

headkaze:

Absolutly, emulating a 3d game in a 2d API is far more complex than using any sort of native 3d platform be it Direct3d or OpenGL.

Pages: << < (4/20) > >>

Go to full version