The Video Game Critic

Gens + SoR 2 = no lag

I think that's a stretch calling them rebuilt, they're simple things any hacker can do. Even though the Legend of Zelda for the NES has a added copyright date and some changes in spelling and such, its still the same code running the game, just with a few character changes. No different really than hacking a 2600 game to make a simple change like giving Asteroids a vector look.[/QUOTE]

No, they actually are rebuilt from the source.  I don't know if you are a developer or not, so I won't comment, but the difference between rebuilding an executable from source code and hacking an executable directly by its bytecode is one of extreme importance to a software company.  I don't know of a single company that would literally release a binary, ROM, or product of a build system that had things hacked directly into said result itself.  It would be considered irresponsible, and from the get-go, any decent QA/Ceritification department would refuse to test it.

This has been my experience in working for at least five software companies, three very small and two very very large, which don't have anywhere near the test-perfect QA that Nintendo has had over the years.

[QUOTE=Leo Ames]"BTW, I don't know what this talk about the N64's clarity on the VC is about"

While i think his complaints about the character and kart sprites is odd since they're not any different appearance wise, playing a N64 game in higher resolutions in emulators makes the game sharper, but it also enhances flaws that might've gone unoticed in the past when people were playing them at lower resolutions with rf or composite output on the 64. Put them at 480p using component and while it improves the appearance, it also magnifys the flaws that were more hidden in the past. I hope that makes a little sense.[/QUOTE]

I know the point that is being made, but I just don't see it myself.  I think I always noticed the flaws.  Before I realized that there was a sincere and objective moral objection to using stolen ROMs on the internet and using emulators to play them, I used Project64 on many of these same games.  These had the same effect as what I see on the Wii -- games that were never designed for that level of visual clarity have it in spades.  I was only impressed with that from the beginning, so I guess I haven't had the same issues from almost years back -- and this was the case given a resolution much higher than 480p on my particular monitor at the time.

[QUOTE=Leo Ames]"It doesn't save ghost data for your races, which means you can no longer race against ghost players"

That's a big loss, you could fit what? 1 or 2 ghost time trials into a N64 memory card? I'm not sure I ever even tried it since it would've meant dedicating a card to MK64 basically.[/QUOTE]

Sarcasm noted, only I wasn't the one complaining.  I was merely reporting the situation, which by the way, Nintendo announces to you in clear language before you agree to download the game on the Wii Shopping Channel.

I actually did do that once or twice on my N64, but I never really found much reason to do it often.  It's kind of odd, but when I play against myself in ghost mode, either in MK64 or on Elite Beat Agents, I almost always lose to myself.  I am not sure why, but play against yourself in a game that supports that sometime and you might find yourself impossible to beat.

Man, I really didn't mean to open this whole technical can of worms. Just a debate about the merits of the VC versus XBLA. Yowza.

Just one quick comment to something Leo said: No, it isn't the "games fault" that MK64 has some issues that are age related, but those issues would be lessened or completely eliminated by running the game on an N64 on a normal TV setup. My whole point there is that sometimes running an old game on better hardware can mess with it a little bit.

And really, I love the VC, and MK64, but I was just trying to play Devil's advocate.

*creeps away from thread*

-Rob

Mozart, oftentimes the source code isn't even available anymore. Even stable companies that haven't gone through the turmoil of say Atari, such as Capcom, often don't have the original source code to work with. Guess where the 2600 roms for Atari Anthology came from for example? The same files you can go and download from at www.atariage.com  They weren't recompiled from often non existant source code, just dumps from original cartridges. There are also plenty of cases of games that have been hacked or whatever you want to call it, without referancing the original source code, that have seen release. The vector Asteroids hack on the Flashback II is one such example, Tempest Tubes also comes to mind on Atari Anthology. The author didn't referance the original source, the final effort was achieved the same way as most homebrew authors alter code. Activision also had several  hacks of its games from the 80's from bootleggers prepared for the download service for Activision Anthology before Sony killed off the download portion (That would've been accessed by the telephone on the desk). These were just dumps from original cartridges that were done by programmers that reverse engineered Activision's code back in the 80s, and all this was approved by Activision's legal department and QA.

I don't really care how Nintendo did it, but it doesn't change the fact that 99.9% of the code in the Virtual Console releases is the same as the original cartridge release. If they did it using the original source code and recompiled it, that's fine, it's still the same game even if it has a different copyright date and such. You can extract the file from Ocarina of Time on the GameCube, for example, burn it to eprom, and play it on your N64 with no issues. How Nintendo went back and changed the Z button designations to reflect the correct button for the GC and added a copyright date to the title screen really isn't important. It's still fair to call it the original code running under emulation, even if a miniscule portion of that code has been modified.  I guess this is my fault, I heard you say rebuilt and I had in my mind that you were under the mistaken impression that there have been more than just minor alterations to the original code.

[/QUOTE]

I know all too well that that sort of thing has happened, especially when companies have changed hands as often as Atari is.  Of course, I don't have confirmation that Atari's anthologies are not rebuilds, but I don't know enough about Atari's practices to doubt you.  Again, of the five companies I've worked for that simply hasn't been the case.  there is code and machines available for build all the way back to 1981, at least, for my current corporation, and my last company, which worldwide had about 150 employees, had the same setup.  You are talking as if this sort of practice is unheard of and I am telling you, point blank, that it is most decidedly not.

[QUOTE=Leo Ames]I don't really care how Nintendo did it, but it doesn't change the fact that 99.9% of the code in the Virtual Console releases is the same as the original cartridge release. If they did it using the original source code and recompiled it, that's fine, it's still the same game even if it has a different copyright date and such. You can extract the file from Ocarina of Time on the GameCube, for example, burn it to eprom, and play it on your N64 with no issues. How Nintendo went back and changed the Z button designations to reflect the correct button for the GC and added a copyright date to the title screen really isn't important. It's still fair to call it the original code running under emulation, even if a miniscule portion of that code has been modified.  I guess this is my fault, I heard you say rebuilt and I had in my mind that you were under the mistaken impression that there have been more than just minor alterations to the original code.[/QUOTE]

No, at least not so far.  However, it is not out of the question should the need arise.  Nintendo made it clear several years ago that when porting original titles for the NES and SNES to the Gameboy Advance, they were using more than just the original ROMs.  They were porting from original source code.  By doing so, they were able to make significant changes to titles such as the many Mario ports and the one port of "A Link to the Past" while simultaneously keeping the ports very near perfect.  The latter, in fact, had more than just text redone and voice work added -- it had at least two floors of an entire dungeon redesigned to be easier to solve, along with a new dungeon and new quests tied to the Four Sword game, and it did so by using ported source code, not by hacking ROMs and plugging an emulator in.

I am fully aware that VC games haven't yet seen significant changes.  Heck, I am probably buying more VC titles than anyone on this forum.  Regardless of what is going on now, I see the practice changing as more titles are added.  They may not even be changes we notice, but they may be significant nonetheless, and also very required for the games to run in their new environment.

They had no choice with those titles but to rework them, the Game Boy Advance is unable to emulate something as powerful as the Super Nintendo (Which the Mario Advance series comes from since the ports are based off the Super Mario All-Star updates). As you must know, they aren't emulated.

I doubt we'll ever see something more extensive for a reworked title under emulation from Nintendo then added copyright dates, corrected spelling (Rupees in the LoZ instead of the original rupy), etc.

Just what changes are you expecting Nintendo to make? I find it doutful that Nintendo will go back and extensively rework anything for the Virtual Console series beyond text changes. The most work I'd expect to see is if we manage to get some previousily unreleased Japan only titles in the future, which would require a English translation.

[QUOTE=Leo Ames]Just what changes are you expecting Nintendo to make? I find it doutful that Nintendo will go back and extensively rework anything for the Virtual Console series beyond text changes. The most work I'd expect to see is if we manage to get some previousily unreleased Japan only titles in the future, which would require a English translation.[/QUOTE]

Well the purpose of the Virtual Console is to deliver the same gaming experience that was available on the console, at least as close as possible.  So any changes will almost certainly not be things we see, or at least not things that give us a new gaming experience.  But assuming for a moment that Nintendo cannot make the emulation perfect on the side of the emulator itself, i.e. all of the various fixes to the emulation engine either break other existing games, or introduce more problems to the game as it presently stands, or even that time simply doesn't permit changing the emulator and retesting all released ROMs over again before issuing a system update, Nintendo might make changes to the game code before rebuilding to fascilitate it's execution on the emulator.

For instance, let's assume that another game attempts to use controller 2's memory card in the N64, something that the emulator cannot do, similar to MK64.  In fact, let's assume that doing so causes the emulator to crash.  Nintendo might not be able to fix the emulator in time, even though it certainly intends to do so later, or it might decide that the controller 2 memory card issue will never be resolved because no game made adequate use of it.  Code might be changed to block off that feature, so that when the ROM is rebuilt, the feature will be met with a simple text block announcing that the feature isn't available, instead of allowing it to proceed and crashign the emulator, and thus the Wii.