Acmlm's Board - I2 Archive - Rom Hacking - ...Ive got a cunning idea about the GBA
| User | Post |
Geiger
Posts: 105/460 |
Originally posted by jonwil
Therefore, PocketNES has to also be licenced as GPL (IANAL so I dont know the exact legaleze involved).
Depends on how he uses it. For example, if I wanted to use some GPLed compression code, I could stick it in a DLL and make calls to it. The DLL would have to be GPLed (derivative work) but the main executable would not (independant work). So, I would be free to tell the GPL fanboys to go take a flying leap.
---Evil Peer |
Gavin
Posts: 176/799 |
Originally posted by Clockworkz
Anyways.... I know it's probably not emulated, for one simple reason: In the NES version, when you enter the gambling cave, the old man says: "LET'S PLAY MONEY MAKING GAME". In the GBA Version, he says: "LET'S PLAY A MONEY MAKING GAME". A small change, but a change, nonetheless 
not neccessarily, those types of changes are small and extremely easy to make |
HyperLamer
Posts: 1538/8210 |
Like I said, edited resources. The Gamecube OoT has button icons replaced and text changed but it's still an N64 game. |
Clockworkz
Posts: 1406/2002 |
Anyways.... I know it's probably not emulated, for one simple reason: In the NES version, when you enter the gambling cave, the old man says: "LET'S PLAY MONEY MAKING GAME". In the GBA Version, he says: "LET'S PLAY A MONEY MAKING GAME". A small change, but a change, nonetheless |
dan
Posts: 164/782 |
Originally posted by jonwil
Actaully, PocketNes uses the MiniLZO library.
Which is released under the GNU GPL.
Therefore, PocketNES has to also be licenced as GPL (IANAL so I dont know the exact legaleze involved).
Therefore, Jaleco using it without complying with the GPL is violating the GPL on MiniLZO.
At least thats my non lawyer understanding
Nope. Jaleco took out the MiniLZO library (the emulator in their game lacks savestates), so they are technically off the hook. Although, PocketNES technically should have been released under a GPL license. It's not like Loopy is going to go to prison or get sued to all hell, is it though?
I personally don't like the GNU GPL, as it forces people to do things that they may want to do. Like, if you use a single line of GNU GPL'd code, you have to use the GPL license. It doesn't really matter to me though, I never use other people's code (I can't understand half of it anyways), and I just use the BSD license for any source code I release.
I mean, come on, it's not like Microsoft or a company is going to come along and steal code that I used to make ROM editors with. And as for so-called "code stealers", who recompile code, and remove the author's name, I really don't care.  Mainly, because I couldn't really do anything about it, even if the software did have a GPL license. I mean, what lawyer would take me seriously, if I said: "Some guy on the Internet violated the license to my program which does things which may be illegal!" |
The Arkichef
Posts: 44/75 |
...Loopy can take Nintendo to court? Woah...might be a bit risky tho, he might get sued himself:s |
Kagerato
Posts: 19/25 |
Yeah, that seems accurate, jonwil.
Excerpt from GPL:
2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it, thus forming a work based on the Program, and copy and distribute such modifications or work under the terms of Section 1 above, 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.
and also...
Excerpt from GPL:
These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it.
|
jonwil
Posts: 12/25 |
Actaully, PocketNes uses the MiniLZO library.
Which is released under the GNU GPL.
Therefore, PocketNES has to also be licenced as GPL (IANAL so I dont know the exact legaleze involved).
Therefore, Jaleco using it without complying with the GPL is violating the GPL on MiniLZO.
At least thats my non lawyer understanding |
dan
Posts: 161/782 |
I don't think the NES classics use PocketNES, as I believe that Loopy confirmed that it didn't use PocketNES. However, there was a game by Jaleco (I think) that does use PocketNES. The forum that the posts were on, seems to be dead or something, but there's a story about Jaleco using PocketNES here. |
Kagerato
Posts: 18/25 |
PocketNES doesn't seem to be released under any sort of restrictive license (i.e. cannot be used for commercial enterprise, or such garbage).
Regardless of what license the emulator is or is not released under, it's legal if Nintendo acquired permission from the author. And who would turn down such a request? |
HyperLamer
Posts: 1506/8210 |
Nintendo uses PocketNES?  Is that legal?
If it is an emulator, I'm sure the ROMs are probably unmodified, just with headers added. That's how they did N64 games on Gamecube. They simply added 'traps' to the emulator so that, say, when the game starts to run its write-to-SRAM code, the emulator dumps the info from memory, writes it to the memory card, and resumes emulation at the code segment just after that with all variables set to what they should be. Hence why the save screen in Zelda looks so hacky. (Of course, this means that if you modified the save code in the ROM, nothing would happen, which could be confusing... ) The only real changes made are to some resources, like changing the Z button icon to an L button. |
Parasyte
Posts: 143/514 |
NES classic ROMs are interesting. All of the boot code is encrypted and compressed to hell. The reason? *shrug* seems like a sort of copy protection. 
Anyway, the NES ROMs are also likely compressed and\or encrypted as well. |
DahrkDaiz
Posts: 314/885 |
I looked in Metroid Fusion and confirmed that the rom of Metroid.nes is indeed in Metroid Fusion, but not in the same form. It's got some extra bytes, probably denoting a break in the code which the emulator should stop loading code or something, but the ROM is in there in it's full form. If the same emulator is used in MF as it is in these classic series, then they have the original roms in them, but applying patches for .nes files won't work for the .gba counter parts because of the rom differences (the extra bytes) and some code is modified to save high scores, Im sure. |
BMF98567
Posts: 315/1261 |
It's my understanding that the official Nintendo emulator is indeed PocketNES, with modified sound code (exactly what, I'm not sure). Loopy went through the code and confirmed it himself. |
dan
Posts: 155/782 |
Yeah, it's definitely an emulator. If it was a port, do you think they could have knocked so many NES classics games out at once?  Plus, if they had ported it, they probably would have fixed the squishing screen.
I think the emulator isn't as complete as pocketnes. If you look at the games being released, they seem to be only mappers 0,1 and 2. Whereas Pocketnes supports way more mappers and games.
They may have encrypted (or compressed) the NES ROMs though. I've not heard of anyone who actually looked in the GBA ROM for the NES ROM, so that's just speculation on my part.
The whole NES classics series is a bit of a rip-off anyways. They could probably fit 100+ NES games on a single GBA if they really wanted to. But, there wouldn't be much profit in that. |
Ailure
Posts: 4713/11162 |
And even then, I wouldn't be surprised if the emulator was made just for running that game. In other words it would run other games than it was made for worser than Pocketnes. 
And well, if there is a NES ROM in the GBA ports. It's more than just applying a patch. Someone must documentate the diffrence between the orginal NES and the GBA port one. It's not worth it I can say. Pocketnes does the job with less hassle... |
MathOnNapkins
Posts: 411/2189 |
Originally posted by Smallhacker
My guess is that it's ported, not emulated, since an emulator would probably slow the game down a bit...
Probably not, the GBA's processor is quite fast. |
Smallhacker
Posts: 471/2273 |
My guess is that it's ported, not emulated, since an emulator would probably slow the game down a bit... |
The Arkichef
Posts: 41/75 |
I was playing the new conversion of the nes zelda for the gba the other day...and i was wondering, isnt it just the actual nes game being emulated on a GBA? if so, would it be possible to apply patches of nes hacks to the nes gba releases, or easily create editors? And yes, I know about Pocketnes, but the gba ports seem to run a lot...better! |
|
hukka
