• SpookyGenderCommunist [they/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I saved up and bought a reasonably beefy Mini PC, and turned it into an emulation console with Batocera. PS3 emulation runs like an absolute dream. But who needs backwards compatibility, when we can resell you the same game from 15 years ago, again, at full price???

      • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The SPEs on the cell processor are actually pretty good at rendering graphics. In a lot of late gen exclusive PS3 games you can see that the developers utilised them more and more for graphics rendering. So the plan was to have the SPEs on both cell processors do all the graphics.

  • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    It is hard. PS3 has incredibly specialized hardware. Even game developers had trouble making games for it at the time because it’s so arcane.

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Nah, that’s still a bunch of bull, they designed it and have all the documentation. They know all of its functionality, hidden or otherwise, it’s “undocumented” functions, it’s quirk’s, the very ins and outs of it. They probably still have original designers on staff. They have far more knowledge and experience of their own design than any game developers.

      And yet RPCS3, an open source PS3 emulator based on reverse engineered research is able to achieve decent playability on most games.

      Not to mention, they’re a multi-billion dollar company, don’t make excuses for them.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        There can be a lot of subtle changes going from one uarch to another.

        Eg, C/C++ for x64 and ARM both use a coprocessor register to store the pointer to thread-local storage. On x64, you can offset that address and read it from memory as an atomic operation. On ARM, you need to first load it into a core register, then you can read the address with offset from memory. This makes accessing thread-local memory on ARM more complicated to do in a thread safe manner than on x64 because you need to be sure you don’t get pre-empted between those two instructions or one thread can end up with another’s thread-local memory pointer. Some details might be off, it’s been a while since I dealt with this issue. I think there was another thing that had to line up perfectly for the bug to happen (like have it happen during a user-mode context switch).

        And that’s an example for two more similar uarchs. I’m not familiar with cell but I understand it to be a lot more different than x64 vs ARM. Sure, they’ve got all the documentation and probably still even have the collective expertise such that everything is known by at least someone without needing to look it up, but those individuals might not have that same understanding on the x64 side of things to see the pitfalls before running into them.

        And even once they experience various bugs, they still need to be debugged to figure out what’s going on, and there’s potential that the solution isn’t even possible in the paradigm used to design whatever go-between system they were currently working on.

        They are both Turing complete, so there is a 1:1 functional equivalence between them (ie, anything one can do, the other can). But it doesn’t mean both will be able to do it as fast as the other. An obvious example of this is desktops with 2024 hardware and desktops with 1990 hardware also have that 1:1 functional equivalence, but the more recent machines run circles around the older ones.

      • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        For profit corporations should not be trusted to preserve out culture. They would happily delete everything it if made then 1 dollar

      • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        AFAIK, the documentation isn’t the main problem. I’m pretty sure PS3 is quite well understood.

        The problem is how to translate the code to a typical X86 architecture. PS3’s uses a very different architecture with a big focus on their own special way on doing parallelism. It’s not an easy translation, and it must be done at great speed.

        The work on RPCS3 incredible, but it took them more than a decade of optimizations to get where they are now. Wii U emulation got figured out relatively quickly in comparison, even if it uses similar specs to PS3.

        • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          The Wii U was just a souped up Wii so of course the emulation scene had a Wii U emulator in no time.

    • Cyth@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I don’t think it being hard is really the issue. Sony is a billion dollar multi-national corporation and they don’t get any benefit of the doubt whatsoever. Is it hard? Maybe it is, but maybe they should have thought of what they were going to do in the future when they were designing this. As was pointed out elsewhere, volunteers making an open source emulator are managing it so Sony not wanting to, or being unable to, isn’t an excuse.