|
I think it should be the next console they should add ROBLOX to.
Not only would you be able to play ROBLOX on your TV like a console (XBone, PS4, etc.) but you'll be able to easily play it on the go.
It's way better than mobile/tablet gaming too. It has more controls and a better processor than most smartphones.
I think it'll be a great idea. |
|
cheetos5Join Date: 2013-05-15
Post Count: 23541 |
|
|
sourkJoin Date: 2012-11-30
Post Count: 1181 |
good idea but i want roblox in psvita
-ROBLOX Forums? r+://515806914r+://515806952 |
|
lnkieJoin Date: 2016-09-12
Post Count: 5326 |
PS Vita won't happen. Last gen handheld and a processor that can't very well handle multiplayer, take Minecraft PS Vita as an example. |
|
lnkieJoin Date: 2016-09-12
Post Count: 5326 |
Sorry. |
|
|
roblox on DS is better
"When will you learn, when you learn, THAT YOUR ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES!" |
|
PuretJoin Date: 2015-07-18
Post Count: 2026 |
I BET THEY ARE ;D
▶ 🔘 ──────── 01:35 |
|
|
you're serious
Look, we don't even know what the instruction set for the X2 (excuse me, "P1" Tegra) is even like (we know it's ARM-based, but how different from ARMv8 is it? There's the Cortex-something in it too, but I'd assume that's just a coprocessor for things like sound. We already know the Denver processor in it is all over the place in differences from mainline ARM), let alone have GCC available to compile ROBLOX for the new Tegra chipset.
If GCC can't compile for that architecture, you're writing your own compiler, and speaking from experience, you do not want to write your own compiler. No matter how hard you try, it will never be as fast, as optimized, or as well-built as GCC. Microsoft's compiler can barely compete with GCC. A single person can't make their own compiler to chuck GCC out the window, and Apple is barely doing OK with theirs.
And if you actually use Microsoft's compiler (Visual Studio), yeah good luck porting that to anything without porting GCC to Windows first anyway. Seeing as how Visual C++ 2015 can't be trusted to output the exact binary you needed (leaks about with binary diffs revealing extra code crammed in for telemetry on Windows), good luck writing the machine code for GCC by hand yourself.
Or you can use MinGW, but are you willing to risk trusting someone else to have the binaries the exact way they're supposed to be?
My personal opinion, especially since it's heavilly implied that the Denver will be completely binary compatible with the mainline ARM anyway, but I wouldn't want to port my program to some other architecture without absolutely taking advantage of the hardware as best as possible. Sure it makes more #ifdefs and all, but it'll result in performance increase.
I'm actually more interested in what in the world OS the Switch is going to run. They can't just port the DS/3DS/GameBoy OS back to it again, this is a new architecture that isn't just the old one + some new fun stuff. They especially can't just port the GameCube/Wii/Wii U OS either as this isn't even in the same processor family (ARM vs PowerPC)
They'll probably make a really modified version of the 3DS system software for it, but deep down I really would like to see them make a #### ## FreeBSD and use that and make it great... mostly because it's just easier to break into system internals once you know enough about it. Sure you're not going to root it, but as long as it's not encrypted, you'll be able to rip things out easier, because the OS internals are all already known.
plus FreeBSD has a *really good* TCP/IP stack
like Microsoft effectively copy/pasted it into Windows kind of good.
tl;dr:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztVMib1T4T4 |
|
|
just let Nintendo be Nintendo. |
|
|
|
OF COURSE GUYS ROBLOX U WOULD DO A MARIO AND LUIGI SAVE PEACH EVENT!!!!!! |
|
SpletzJoin Date: 2012-07-27
Post Count: 3048 |
Support! |
|
BadawanJoin Date: 2011-02-18
Post Count: 18646 |
PS4 first m8 |
|
|
@DoAnAileronRoll
Umm...what? |
|
|
ROBLOX on the Magnovox Oddysey.
#code if R+ is cool then game.Players.Sufganiyot:BreakJoints() |
|
|
roblox would never do this since they ignore every single suggestion/request they see.
Do you ever get that moment when ########? |
|
|
I SUPPORT THIS.
Time to tip the scales! |
|
|
|
"
Umm...what?"
did you not read any of what I just said |
|
|
@DoAnAileronRoll
I did, but I don't see how all that could prevent ROBLOX from coming to the Nintendo Switch. |
|
|
I'm saying the hardware for the Switch is already completely unknown. OK, you know it's sort of an ARM-based system and it's sort of a big giant 3DS that pumps out 720p real easy, but you know nothing else about it.
You can't program for hardware you know nothing about. Good luck porting to the Switch without any SDKs at the very least.
There's no way in hell ROBLOX has any sort of capability to port to the Switch.
Bethesda doesn't have an SDK at the least, EA's implied they don't have one, NO ONE HAS ONE. Sure, you can get away with software emulation and be given an SDK, but without ANY TOOLS TO DEVELOP FOR A SYSTEM, YOU'RE NOT DEVELOPING FOR THE SYSTEM.
(And if you do anyway, that's called homeb#########exactly something you're going to be able to sell to just anyone, because of the nature of consoles.)
We don't even know anything about the operating system of the Switch. Is it a UNIX-like, like Linux or the PlayStation, or is it yet again another in-house completely and totally arbitrary OS, made by Nintendo, where who knows what the system calls are and how to do ANYTHING on it.
The most you can do without touching the OS's kernel is basically nothing. Especially since in order to get a program to run on an OS, you need to treat it in a special way, comply with a whole bunch of formats and standards, and it's just impossible to make one "ROBLOXClient.elf" that runs on anywhere*
*unless you make a fat-elf, but that's technically cheating because you multiply filesize by like 10 and it still doesn't support EVERYTHING. Plus no one's messed with FatELF in like forever too. |
|
|
@DoAnAileronRoll
Well, obviously, you can't make something on a platform you know nothing about.
I thought it was implied that ROBLOX should add themselves to the Nintendo Switch once it becomes a well-known and developer friendly platform, but my bad. |
|
|
if you can't get code to run (as in compile, link, execute) on a system, you're not getting the game to run on the system.
Plain as that I guess.
No one has access to internals of the Switch, no one has a compiler for the Switch hardware, thus, no one has a suitable linker for the Switch, and you can't execute a program that's not been compiled. You can't. You can try, we call that interpretted languages like Lua*, but even then that still requires some sort of running program in the background, and thus, something needs to be compiled.
Bethesda's pretty much admitted that Skyrim on the Switch was probably just an overlay on top of a green screen, they did that in the Avatar movie to do the holographic panels and stuff too. They've said they don't have Skyrim on the Switch, and thus probably don't have development tools for it.
I'd seriously like to see someone try to get some C++ code to work on something without any program in the background doing anything to manipulate it. No no no, just text, and this text does what it's supposed to do. No compiler. No VM interpretting it. Not even the OS treating it special.
That's fundamentally impossible. There's no way you could possibly do that. And no, running the text of the file as an executable (by copy/pasting the raw ASCII values into a .data section of some other executable) is still cheating. Clever, but cheating.
You can't port ROBLOX without a compiler. You can't port DOOM without a compiler. You can't port Chrome or Firefox without a compiler. Hell you can't port GCC without a compiler, (hence we get the chicken and egg problem, the answer is to bootstrap by the way and to produce machine code for a machine other than your machine, so that you can't do anything with it, but another one can... if you compile the compiler for a different machine, then you have a self-hosting compiler which can then compile itself on it's native platform, hence, how we have GCC on just about everything. The solution is that the dinosaur creates a chicken egg, which creates a chicken, which produces a chicken egg.)
We know nothing about the Switch's internal hardware, thus we don't really know a ton about it's instruction set other than it's mostly the exact same as ARMv8, and thus we cannot generate native machine code for a machine we don't have and know nothing about. Thus, you cannot get a compiler for it, and thus you cannot port ROBLOX to a system which cannot have programs compiled for it.
I mean you can write machine code for it yourself, but no one's done that since like the 1960s.
* if the machine language happens to be some sort of monstrosity of human-readable code. i.e., no bytecode step, just raw source code.
|
|
|
@DoAnAileronRoll
Yes, I get it already. You don't have to write essays in response.
All I was saying is that we have to wait until the Switch's full release (or a developer conference) until developers can make games for it. ROBLOX can't start working on a Nintendo Switch port just yet. I know. I was just suggesting it as an idea of a potential future platform once the Switch takes off. |
|
|
Haha sorry, I tend to type responses fairly slowly. |
|