Talk:Nintendo 64 emulators
>Its developers have expressed intentions to eventually rewrite the core and brand it as its own emulator, called ParaLLEl.
Hey, it looks like ParaLLEl is already available in Retroarch. I don't know how good it is exactly as I've only tried Paper Mario so far, but there's no flickering in it as mentioned on the mupen64 comparability wiki. -Anon
Graphics comparison table
[edit source]The main page of the N64 emus is too large probably, so I put this here as a backup source. I've already added it to the Resources sector at three other pages (for 3 comparable systems). ObiKKa (talk) 18:17, 28 April 2019 (EDT)
- Graphics comparison table (for Saturn as opposed to PS1, N64, Sega Model 2 arcade hardware and 1995-era PC)
What's Depth output?
[edit source]LLE emulators would support it. If GlideN64 calls that "Use emulator help to read/write frame buffers" option, I think Project64 is not supported.
I was wondering about this as well. Does it refer perhaps to the N64-style depth compare option in GLideN64? Because Mupen64Plus-Next has that option, unless it's not working for some reason.
Ares recommended?
[edit source]This is just my opinion, but while ares has certainly made strides for such a new emulator, I'm not sure it's good enough to flat-out recommend over even Project64. Its compatibility is still the lowest among the currently-active emulators, and it has serious problems with several high-profile games, such as DK64.
On that note, perhaps simple64 should be moved back up to recommended. It does have some regressions, but its compatibility is still quite high, and it does fix some issues present in regular Mupen64Plus.
Comparison table is getting crowded
[edit source]There are a huge amount of columns in it, and I think it's getting harder to read and process everything. Compiling every single feature in a single place may not be the best idea, especially if we're talking about features only a few emulators support or even plan on supporting. This also applies to other pages but this one illustrates this problem the most, for me. I think we should bring back separate tables in dedicated sections, and keep general features in the main table. FulguroBoy (talk) 13:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
I respectfully disagree with you about that. Actually I think separating tables/divs in dedicated sections = "it's getting harder to read and process everything." Ahayri (talk)
Well, while we're on the subject, I think it makes sense to remove the "libretro" column - it only applies to ParaLLEl-N64 and Mupen64Plus-Next, for which it's already pointed out they're libretro cores, and technically MAME, which nobody in their right mind uses for N64, let alone on the libretro core. GPDP1 (talk)
If we're removing the libretro column for this article, we might as well remove the column for all articles. I think the libretro column should stay. Jadasse (talk)
"Accuracy" column instead of "Plugins", what do you guys think?
[edit source]Example
[edit source]| Name | Platform(s) | Latest version | Accuracy | Controller Pak |
Rumble Pak |
Transfer Pak |
64DD | N64 Mouse |
Texture enhancement |
Netplay | FLOSS | Active | Recommended | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PC / x86 | ||||||||||||||
| RMG |  
|
0.9.0 Dev |
Plugin Dependent |
✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✗ | ✓ | ~< | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
I think it would be an excellent idea, since it would provide a good overview on how precise the non-plugins emulators are, especially on console and mobile, and we would get rid of those question marks FulguroBoy (talk) 14:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Done. Ahayri (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Bringing back RetroAchievements column?
[edit source]Should we wait for another emulator to support "RetroAchievements" because at the moment, only two libretro core (Mupen64Plus-Next and ParaLLEl-N64) supports this feature.
Ahayri (talk) 22:33, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
RA support added to BizHawk with 2.9 version. (RA supported emulators atm: Mupen64Plus-Next, ParaLLEl-N64 and BizHawk) Ahayri (talk) 18:59, 7 Apr 2023 (UTC)
Done. Ahayri (talk) 16:03, 11 Apr 2023 (UTC)
Parallel Launcher
[edit source]Why isn't Parallel Launcher recommended? It combines the accuracy of ParaLLEl-N64 to an interface that doesn't make you scream in frustration! -172.69.3.147 03:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
You could add that to the comparison paragraph.
kaizen
[edit source]interesting new project: https://github.com/SimoneN64/Kaizen#roadmap Ahayri (talk) 22:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
possible additions
[edit source]it might be nice to add https://www.raphnet.net/divers/n64_bio_sensor/index_en.php , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morita_Shogi_64 and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_V64 13:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Recommended Emulators Seem Outdated Again
[edit source]Looks like there's been some shakeup in the N64 Emu space, so someone should compare the emulators available now I think.
- simple64 is dead. The developer has archived the code and deleted the project website. They're moving their attention to a new, performance-focused emulator named gopher64.
- Romhacking.com has this big scary banner that says Project 64 versions prior to 3.0, all versions of Mupen64, and earlier versions of Bizhawk are vulnerable. They recommend using Parallel64 only. However, this doesn't make sense to me.
- Firstly there's no source for the exploit so, like, lol, lmao, do the developers of these emulators even know? Have they been informed?
- Does this include Mupen64-Next? If so, how come it has this exploit but BizHawk - which uses Mupen as a base - patched it? Did BizHawk not send their patch upstream?
- The developers of Parallel Launcher probably have certain interests in making people prefer the outdated Parallel64.
Orangestar (talk) 06:38, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
I will answer the second question.
- Project 1.6 is Cooked!
- There was Paper Mario TAS that Blue screen on Bizhawk 2.9.1
- Probably, because the volunteers are DEAD!
- You know the core is updatable right? (Because you play Super Mario 64 Romhacks)
--P0008874 (talk) 16:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Alright, well, I didn't know these things, which is why I asked. So my original point is if these are true then they should be changed on the page.
- If the maintainers of Mupen64-Next are dead and there is no active fork with maintainers and the currently available release has ACE exploits, then it should not be listed as recommended in the grid.
- If Parallel64 is no longer considered outdated and has received patches to keep it accurate and maintained in comparison to other N64 emulators, then we should not be calling it outdated in the article proper and be recommending it as well.
I don't usually play SM64 romhacks. I just ended up on RHDC one day and noticed the banner, so I went here to check if it was corroborated because I'm not familiar with the N64 Emu space and do not want to make assumptions or edit information where I am not knowledgeable. These would make for great citations for the recommendation table in addition to a paragraph about the exploit.
Orangestar (talk) 18:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
Placing MISTER and other fpga cores in table?
[edit source]Currently, MISTER's fpga core is one of better choice for emulating N64. Maybe it's time for adding some fpga cores into tables for supported system. Yes, they required using some specific device, but emulators wrote for some consoles also, and for each console we have an entire section on which another console we could emulate it.