That's not the point of it though. Not about whether you could fix or maintain it when operating it, it's about not operating it if presents a notable risk of failure. The Smithsonian doesn't start grinding cornmeal in a bowl from the Mississippians. The Connecticut Museum doesn't take it's colt rifles out the range for target practice. These organizations would use a replica to demonstrate what it was like, as opposed to risking damaging an original article.

Thats also not even necessary true either. While they may have invented there various consoles, at some point it will be nearly impossible to acquire replacement parts. They don't manufacture the ICs or mainboards or the various discreet components. So if there's no old stock, how would they "fix" a broken N64 (or later) console? It might be theoretically possible to fab a NEC VR4300 to replace a dead one, but probably cost hundreds of thousands, and it wouldn't be broken anyway if you hadn't left if running 16 hours a day so some sweaty tourists could play on real hardware.

And why would they? It would cost more, be more work, and have less reliable results than using a completely replacable computer running an emulator. The entire consumer facing side of the equation is worse if they run the games on the actual hardware, as long as the consumer doesn't see it, which is really down to how they design the exhibit.

Do you think the public is understanding enough to accept that "The NES is really old and it broke so you can't play super mario bros today", when it's the only day you are gonna be there? Temper tantrum, bad reviews, loss of face. From what I understand, Japan actually cares about all that, so Nintendo probably does as well.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh no, poor Nintendo, how could they possibly afford a custom IC fab? They only have more money than God.

The way I see it, they have two choices. Make the investment to supply their museum with original hardware, or be ok with emulation. They're trying to have their cake and eat it too, and that's shitty.

[–] cryptiod137 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That would just be wasteful, and wouldn't really be the same thing? Analogue already makes N64 FPGAs make things that are almost N64s, and Nintendo doesn't seem to care.

Your forgetting that Nintendo emulates there own games all the time, literally since the GameCube.

There argument has never been about what they can do, it's about what you can do. Now they are wrong under US law, but it's not like it's hard to go find ROMs of these games, they aren't even on torrents or shady websites, you can download them directly.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That would just be wasteful

I disagree. If they actually care about the preservation of their history (which is the whole point of museums), they should be willing to invest a tiny fraction of their incredible wealth to do that, if they want to run it themselves.

Your forgetting that Nintendo emulates there own games all the time, literally since the GameCube.

I'm not forgetting anything. That's my whole point. Nintendo has their own emulators, in both software and hardware. Why are they running some Windows emulator on a Windows PC in their own museum? It makes me think that they just took one of the myriad open source emulators (that they're probably trying diligently to get shut down) and installed that, and it wouldn't surprise me if they're playing ripped ROMs on it, given that they include ripped ROMs on their own emulation libraries (that they charge people to access, btw). Because they've proven that they're hypocrites when it comes to emulation.

There argument has never been about what they can do, it's about what you can do.

Right, again, that's my point. Emulation is fine and dandy when Nintendo does it, but not when anyone else does it, yet they still benefit from those other emulators. That's shitty.

[–] cryptiod137 -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Or they could just, I don't know, not burn out console after console running them constantly so they don't have to spend exuberantly. That's if the they can even produce that process node somehow. If not, making a new fab would cost 10s of millions, to produce old and completely antiquated hardware that they can already emulate on there current hardware.

What do think Nintendo does there development on? You think they run the unity editor on the Switch? They have probably used windows emulators for development since the Gamecube, and they absolutely have there own versions. Which open source emulators are they trying shut down? Something from this decade? If you mean Switch emulators, that's just piracy, which I'm all for, but it's not a exactly a moral high ground.

I thought they had included ripped ROMs, someone mentioned in another thread that were packaging the ROMs the same way. I'm not sure if that means the used the same tools or got to same result another way, buts it's only a way of packaging ROMs.

It's there IP, they can choose what's allowed to be done with it. If they want to emulate it, they can. If they want it to only ever play on a N64DD, then thats also up to them. If they benefit from open source emulators, which I mostly doubt, then they as the fault on the emulator developer for being open source. Close it down, make Nintendo license it if you think it's benefiting them unfairly.

I assure you they are currently runnng there in-development Switch2 games on in an emulated environment as we speak.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Or they could just, I don't know, not burn out console after console running them constantly so they don't have to spend exuberantly.

You're grossly overestimating the number of consoles they would "burn through" by having a few of their original original hardware set up in their museum. If you're worried about them running constantly, they could easily have a couple consoles per station that get swapped between throughout the day so that no one console is ever on for more than a few hours. People used their regularly NESes and SNESes for several years, I'm sure you could stretch that to decades of you had the expertise and resources of the company that invented the hardware behind you.
You're grossly overestimating the amount of money it would cost to maintain original hardware. As another user said, hobbyists can maintain an original system themselves for decades using mostly off-the-shelf parts. The rare occurrences where a proprietary Nintendo part needs replaced wouldn't cost tens of millions of dollars. There's thousands of shops that can manufacture small runs of custom ICs or circuit boards for a few thousand bucks. They wouldn't need to maintain a custom multi-million dollar facility.

to produce old and completely antiquated hardware that they can already emulate on there current hardware.

Then emulate on your current hardware, if you're going to use emulation! Don't use a Windows emulator from who-knows-where, when you've repeatedly made clear that you're against other parties emulating your hardware! That's certainly more embarrassing by the way, if your Windows emulator crashes and museum goers are greeted by a Windows BSOD or whatever, instead of the Switch home screen or the Nintendo Online interface.

What do think Nintendo does there development on?

We're talking about NES/SNES games here (which Nintendo doesn't develop anymore, btw), because that's what they were caught using a Windows PC and a Windows emulator for. So either they're using someone else's emulator, or they ported the emulator that runs on the switch to run on Windows (which would be a huge undertaking, considering the architecture and OS differences between a Nintendo Switch and a Windows PC).

If you mean Switch emulators, that's just piracy

Emulation is not piracy.

I thought they had included ripped ROMs

Some of the ROMs on their official library contained signatures from popular ROM rippers, which indicates they straight up just downloaded them from one of the various ROM sites they've been trying to shut down for the last couple decades.

It's there IP, they can choose what's allowed to be done with it. If they want to emulate it, they can.

That's fine, I don't have a problem with anyone emulating anything, including Nintendo. My problem lies with their hypocrisy. If they want to emulate NES/SNES games in their own museum, go for it. But at least use your own emulator on your own hardware, given they have the ability to easily do that. Using a Windows PC and a Windows emulator for that is hypocritical.

[–] cryptiod137 1 points 1 hour ago

NES and SNES processers? Those should be simple enough, although I'm not sure it would be 1 to 1 swap. Anything later? No.

You'd have to make the same processor on the same process node. That's not even just to do transistor size, as that's just one aspect of a particular companies process. No one has made 350nm MIPS dies since, well, the late 90s or early 2000s. So the equipment likely doesn't exist anymore. I think they licensing is open now, but otherwise they would also need to relicense the design, which would be something that would be very hypocritical for Nintendo to do.

Sure a hobbyist could swap a dead passive component out, and probably fix a damaged trace on the PCB, that's where it would stop. I've never seen a hobbyist or even small company make a PCB that complex. I know from personal experience that getting a batch of those made would run in the tens or hundreds of thousands. It actually may also need leaded solder, which would violate Japans version of RoHS. I'm not familiar enough with that standard to know if that would be permissable.

If hobbyist do have the capability to recreate the processor, why would a company like Analogue make an FPGA instead for there N64 clone? Think about all the development they put into that instead of trying to do what you're suggesting is commonplace.

They don't need to make an IC, the need to make the same IC. There are more powerful chips running smart toasters, and they cost a couple of dollars a piece, but that's not the original hardware

Your also assuming that expertise and resources lies with the company, and not the staff themselves. I also know from personal experience how big of mistake that can be.

Anything later than an N64 is going to be progressively harder and harder to fix. By the end of the decade they will probably be emulating N64s. And so on and so forth.

The whole point is to not damage original articles, not to damage and then fix them. That's what's required of US Museum at least. It will matter more and more as the hardware ages and becomes scarcer.

On the next point, I think your giving the public too much credit. The BSoD is probably the most common failure screen in the world, but how many people would know to equate that with a windows PC and just with any computer?

What percent of the population knows what an emulator or emulation is? 1%? Maybe among people who are visiting the Nintendo museum, probably in the double digits, but not by much. The only embarrassment would be a reddit post, which would get turned into garbage news articles and shorts which everyone but us will forget about 3 seconds later. Basically every person that sees it would just be mad it's not working when they happened to be there.

It's is quite literally only there decision what hardware there IP can run on. In every legal way, they are the arbiters of that. Why are we supposed to care what emulator they use? If it's open source, it's as much there's to use as everyone else's. I wouldn't run it on Windows certianly, but that is objectively there decision.

They probably have there own way on running NES/SNES games for development for Switch online or the NES classic, so your silly comment about them no longer developing those not only pointless but also probably wrong.

I've used mGBA on both my Switch and a PC, I'm not sure why you think that would be so hard. That's literally made by a hobbyist, for a more modern system, and runs on several other platforms as well.

All emulation is probably (but not 100 certainly) piracy. It depends on how you read the law, but it seems clear to me that you can't legally transfer software copies without transferring the original. Meaning for it to be legal, you would have to make the copy yourself, and continue owning the original. I say this as someone who fully supports pirating from AAA publishers, including Nintendo.

Can you provide a source for the ripped ROMs? I've been well actually'd on that before, now in both directions, but I can't find an actual source.

These are in the most certain terms possible "rules for thee and not for me" but it's there IP, and they get to set those rules. I wouldn't describe there rights they fight tooth and nail for as hypocritical.

Funnily enough, I'm guessing the whole reason they are emulating NES/SNES is because they were having reliability issues.They probably picked the simplest thing they could get working on short notice.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They could replace all the parts in a SNES or NES with components indefinitely, because inside are either off the shelf components or specifically made components made after schematics from Nintendo. So even if nobody makes such parts anymore at the moment there is nothing (but time and money) that would stop Nintendo to order new parts based on their schematics.

Most issues with old consoles can even be fixed by hobbyists and if they can't that's because they don't have access to the needed information to create new versions of the tailor made components.

So there should be no issue for Nintendo to supply their museum with replicas forever. Yes it would cost way more money then using Emulators, but it would be way more appropriate for their own museum. But no they have chosen the lazy route.

[–] deltapi 5 points 1 day ago

Offering visitors a nes or SNES classic - which are recent, official, Nintendo products would be less embarrassing than using a windows PC.