So I watched reviews of the NES and SNES Classic just to get a feel for how the PS Classic compares and the deal is... Nintendo's micro-consoles weren't perfect. The NES Classic had visible issues, in fact, even input lag, but the deal was none of them were real dealbreakers

So it really wasn't like Sony had to deliver literal perfection to compare if you were thinking that. No, they own their failures without even needing comparison to other products

The ironic saving grace is the ridiculously flimsy backdoor in the PS Classic which I think by definition shouldn't even be called a hack. Plug in a USB keyboard and press the Esc key and you can actually change the PCSX settings now

And OFC this unique situation is only possible because Sony used an open source emulator. So Sony, congrats on playing yourselves? I guess

@plsburydoughboy I still can't get over the fact that they picked a fairly well known as Workable But Not Perfect open-source emulator when they've had the code for a perfect PS1 emulator ever since the PSP, and they have an ARM wrapper for it since the Vita

@plsburydoughboy and like the vita is lower spec ARM hardware than the PS Classic

I just can't

@theoutrider OK, so the deal is, both the PSP and Vita can emulate the PlayStation better than even high end PCs because they share architecture with the original console. That's something not even Mednafen or PCSX2 has access to, because it would be illegal

@plsburydoughboy the Vita is literally an ARM SOC, except an older lower-performance version of the architecture, running at a lower clock speed and with less RAM than the PS Classic

@plsburydoughboy the Vita has more in common with the Classic than the PS1 or even the PSP

@plsburydoughboy (also, fun fact: the Vita actually runs the PSP's PS1 emulator in its own PSP emulator to run PS1 games)

@theoutrider they share the emulator with the PS3, but again, even the PS3 isn't as accurate as the PSP and Vita because it doesn't share that architecture, it has the Cell

So this is something genuinely unique to Sony's portables


@plsburydoughboy again though - from a lowest-level hardware view the Vita is much closer to the PSC than the PSP or PS1

the biggest differences between the Vita and PSC are, I'm going to hazard a guess, in the system software and probably security hardware bits

@plsburydoughboy and the Vita PS1 releases run on the Vita's PSP emulation to the point where if you hack it up to run PSP CFW in the PSP emulator, PS1 games you've bought and installed on the Vita *will show up in the emulated PSP's XMB and you can play them from there*

I would guess the major reason they didn't use their existing PS1 emulator is that the PSC, I'm almost willing to bet, just runs Android or some super cut down ARM Linux where the Vita has a custom OS and so it would be nontrivial work to port over

and similarly, it'd be even more work to port over even just a limited slice of the Vita's OS to the PSC even though the core hardware architecture is *directly compatible*

but it'd need drivers for the newer hardware and changes for the differences in low-level security mechanisms which will be just nonexistent on the PSC board, and so on

but like given a compatible operating system you can just run ARM9 applications on newer revisions of ARM CPUs

hell, when the Raspberry Pi first switched from ARM9 to ARM11 you could swap your boot SD into a newer Pi and it would Just Work

@theoutrider you would know this stuff more than me but I just believe the PS Classic is naturally bottlenecked by PCSX ReArmed, which doesn't need all the power the Classic's hw has to run games, and Mednafen would have really been better equipped to optimize its capabilities

And so the Vita and PSP as is are better at running those games

@plsburydoughboy I'm not even arguing reasons why the PSClassic doesn't run the games properly, I'm just thinking out loud the reasons why they ended up fucking it up so much

(and yes their choice of emulator is yet another problem here)

@plsburydoughboy I'm *guessing* they avoided mednafen because the ARM version of that seems to mostly come via RetroArch, and wasn't there recently some press shittery about someone using RetroArch with no attributions or licence-requred disclosures in a ~retro device~

@theoutrider that doesnt make sense, PCSX and the Rearmed fork are both directly under libretro

@theoutrider ugh libretro is the name for the project that makes Retroarch, anyway the same thing

But anyway it seems that they didnt even properly fork ReArmed, just put up a frontend with less options on it. At least with a fork they can claim to have done something transformative with their own code

@plsburydoughboy yeah

I do wonder if the PSC is running the libretro version of rearmed or a separate build that they wrote their own frontend for, I guess we'll find out as people explore the system

@plsburydoughboy and I'm guessing they didn't make improvements to rearmed because it's GPLv2 licensed, which means any changes Sony make to it they're legally required to also make public and available under GPLv2

@plsburydoughboy that's how the GPL works, and specifically why Microsoft hated Linux so much for a long time - because GPL means it's not viable for unrestrained commercial exploitation and total corporate control

@theoutrider well now they make money off the cloud so theyre even giving Windows away

And yeah theyve already made a Linux fork themselves, for an IoT

@plsburydoughboy this is from 2001 too, but it's a good example of how hard their stance *used* to be

@plsburydoughboy "2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion
of it, ... provided that you also meet all of these conditions:


b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License."

@theoutrider no thats not how it worked. What it is is the devs making the emulator worked with libretro so they would run under the Retroarch frontend, which then lets them set up the emulator + frontend across several OSes like Lakka, Android, and Windows

The main libretro people have a thankless job there

@plsburydoughboy yeah, that's how libretro has mostly worked (and is part of the reason for what emulators are and aren't available on it, because they need to be under a compatible license)

@plsburydoughboy I'm pretty sure that ReARMed is also widely available outside of retroarch though? certainly I recall workmates using it on Android phones before RA became a big thing

@plsburydoughboy like if nothing else, Sony's PS1 emulator is excellent because they have full documentation on the original hardware, presumably all the source code for their development libraries they provided to devs, etc etc

which obviously the PCSX and mednafen devs do not

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!