Talk:Console emulator
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Mid | This article is on a subject of Mid priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
Contents |
[edit] reverse engineering
I was wondering if anyone could dig up a reference to a law that protects from reverse engineering, as I never heard of one. Also, it is not just hobby projects, there are quite a few commercial emulators like bleem! (the company was subsequently sued by Sony and was closed but the court ruled it to be legal!). -- Darklock 00:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV Removal
I'm sorry, but I just don't think this sounds neutral. It seems unusually one-sided to me.
- How does it seem bias then? [[1]]
I was the Anon who put the NPOV notice up. I hadn't realized at the time I was anon. I was recently looking through my contribs, and noticed that Console Emulator wasn't listed.
Anyway, the bias has clearly been removed, and I think the NPOV should be removed.
If you have any questions, feel free to contact me.
--T2X 16:08, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)
I think there should be something on this about the legal statis of emulators themselves as oppsoed to the old ESA VS abandonware VS pirate arguement
[edit] External Links
I don't think wikipedia should link to emulaters that's just asking for legal trouble. Deathawk 21:09, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Emulators are not illegal, provided that they do not contain copyrighted BIOS files. Alcy 10:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
I think the link to Nintendo's FAQ should be removed or a notice of it's bias noted, my biggest problem with it is it's response to the qeustion about a copying device being illegal, and the answer being wrong (such a device is legal, but using it for illegal means is illegal).
- Notice added. Supersheep 15:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] History Intro Removal
Just removed the first paragraph from the History section, which was completely off base. The 80's Atari 2600 compatibility expansion systems were *not* emulation. In these systems (Colecovision's, the Atari 5200's 2, and Intellivision's3), it was a complete 2600 in a smaller footprint that attached to the unit and simply used it for displaying the television signal. There was no emulation. --Marty Goldberg 15:28, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "amateur"
Is it really necessary to refer to people who write emulators and hack ROMs as amateurs? --72.95.155.177 14:00, 26 April 2007
- Yes, its not being done in a derogatory manner. They're not officially produced commercial products by professionals employed at the company, i.e. doing it as a job. The bulk are by hobbyists and others doing it in their free time and out of the enjoyment/satisfaction of it. --Marty Goldberg 20:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Alex Kidd
How can I download Alex Kidd in miracle world? Morris Munroe 16:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Nesticle.jpg
Image:Nesticle.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:17, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
