Hey guys!
Please keep in mind what MSX is/was.
Im quite satisfied with MSX1 btw. It's so much fun because of the limitations. That is what MSX is.
So you can let go on all MSX-like features and make another system. But it won't be an MSX(3).
Good luck on creating a new system with no support and software.

To stay on topic:
I'd like a turbo feature (key or key-combination) for booting and loading.

I'm with PingPong and really happy about how MSX standard works now!

The MSX1 are really funny machines to program for,... do you want more sprites and colourful bitmapped modes?, go to MSX2. Do you want even more colours and H & V scrolls?, um, go to MSX2+. Do you want more horse power and a more advanced sound processing?, TurboR is your machine. Do you want even more?, buy a GFX9000, a Moonsound, CF-IDE, 4Mb, install SymbOS and play Bombaman (or pray for X-tazy being finished...). Beyond that, hey! could be called MSX3; but I'm sure that it will be as funny to program as a PC. Frankly, if there's no TurboR,GFX9000,etc. software, how things can change now for a new hardware?

Anyway, as dreaming is free, here are my favs:

- ADVRAM
- X68000 sprites (a bit better than the ones in GFX9000 )
- Copper list management (like the one found in Amiga)

That's all!

Oh, well, seems that Huey has already exposed perfectly my point of view...

It's about finding a balance between retro/msx-style and new features that make life quite a bit easier. Limitations are fun only once, after that you want to go a step further and you really don't need limitations anymore to be creative. At a certain point you *are* creative, and limited systems limit your output then.

And about moving towards another system for more features, that's not quite the same! Imagine moving to a PC scene or XBox scene (there will be an XBox scene) suddenly you're in the middle of a scene you don't know, people you don't know, systemspecs you don't know, you suddenly need to know a lot about 3d which you never cared for, you suddenly need quite a decent 3d modeller, you need new more advanced tools etc. etc.

In the MSX-scene, it's easier to feel 'at home', the people are known, specs are not too high which means an individual could do multiple things (and very practical that is..). So, it's completely NOT about moving towards a more advanced system if you want advanced features. I've been there, in one of the l337 Amiga/PC-groups, done my share. Returned to the MSX-scene as it was more challenging and more 'at home'. (Not to mention that the PC-scene simply degraded after 3d-cards were introduced and systems got faster, the 3d-cards more or less killed 2d gfx)

True True... I rather be nothing. /haubjobb/

I think 8bit cpu with 50 mhz is unknown area...
GFX9000+50MHZ+16MB RAM Zilog is unknown area...

I think PC need OS like Linux or Windows... Next "PC" need this too...

And non-msx compactible msx3 is not good idea for one reason:
In this days when U want to make new standard you need a lot of money.
U know when Your Dad is oil magnat it is not problem.
Look at amazing BeBox from past...
It was fantastic piece of hardware - but new standard - and they have no milions USD
to sell it well...
So it is better to improve MSX2/TURBO R standard.
Maybe as FPGA but stay MSX.
Maybe as "toy" for kids like philosophy of "C64 joystick" but open for homebrew in some kind of case - like d4 OCM...
Make a lot of games ,trackers ,paint ,demos...
Clubs,Partys,Demopartys...NEW FRIENDS...
This is platform. Not have 256bit cpu 16xcore,32gb ram... And kick all...
U know there are bigger players out there btw know U Microsoft,Sony...
So this is nonsense to make next ARM,PPC,MIPS or other 32bit/64bit Risc based system...
Maybe improve R800... More speed... U can buy Gameboy DSLite or PSP and code some stuff for 32bit risc...
Remember PCs are for 3d Net games,films etc etc... Why MSX3???
Look at Wii people still loves oldschool... And that trend will be stronger at next 5 years...
Not all players love 3d or they start hate 3d... My opinion there are only few excellent and ORIGINAL 3Ds.
Lot of look same like they are clones of clones... So I personally hate milions same games from nowadays..
But it is only my own point of view.My own opinion...
There are a lot of old school gamers,users... out there.

MSX3 = KEEP NEXT MSX not PC like...

@Matej: Word!

I'm back at the MSX scene not because I'm a fanboy. But because MSX has limitations that won't let me do everything I want. It's much much MUCH more fun.

I don't like PC development (or any other current system) It will let me do what I want because there are no limits; everyone can do it, or even better.

The MSX limits us all. Doing so our scope is narrowed down and makes developing much much easier an more satisfying. We know we used MSX to the fullest.
As for PC's: I only see a financial limitation. As long as you have enough mony you can buy the most advanced stuff which can do amazing stuff.

As for the retro scene.
Is think Matej is right. The scene will become bigger/stronger but especialy united. As years pass all fanboy-ism will make place for interest in other retro computers.

I've always been looking into how MSX could do things modern PC can. But it should have been the other way around. It's more inportant to know what modern PC's don't have and MSX does have; well those exellent Konami's for one!

And for now I'll leave this thread alone....................... I have a MSX1 project to finish.

Well, I think an MSX3 should be a improvement to call it MSX3. Just adding ADVRAM, 16 sprites on a row and let's say 18 fmpac channels is not an improvement. It just makes your MSX2 software incompatible with the real MSX2, for no obvious reason.

Quote:

And non-msx compactible msx3 is not good idea for one reason:

Well, I suggest an MSX compatibility part (that's why I didn't mind the first OCM to be just MSX1, nice and small), with added cpu, vdp, and soundchip. These added chips should not be compatible, but just as good as possible. Image what a mess the V9978 would have been, compared to the V9990.

Quote:

In this days when U want to make new standard you need a lot of money.

An MSX3 standard probably just needs an MSX Association.

Quote:

Well, I think an MSX3 should be a improvement to call it MSX3. An MSX3 standard probably just needs an MSX Association.

Indeed, MSX Association should define a new standard (hopefully with input of the scene).
Also because they can think bigger then a part of the scene (no offence) including me.

But I do hope that the improvements are not to ambitious (for example high speed z80 would be fine as cpu, we don't need 32 bits z380 or ARM cpu) and will be introduced step by step as much as possible. Otherwise we need to wait maybe a couple of years for any new hardware improvement.

Quote:

MsxKun & sojerd: Msx is not so bad actually. It needs only some touchs. Most people complain about the 8 sprites / scanline limit. Trust me. Sprite are the wrong way. Forget please! They are only for limited 8 bits machines that could not do quick data transfer . Even the AMIGA had it but almost no-one used sprites HW, because SW sprites with blitter are more and more nice and flexible.

I agree that MSX only needs some touchs. I can pass without HW sprites on SC5 and so, but it's more difficult, actually, on SC4. Maybe, one Screen mode thant allows 4bpp on a tile based mode? Like Megadrive.
Anyways, if the data transfer is very quick, you can make these tile on SC5 without problems
So, I want more vram pages available, then

What about a filter like hq2x ? This would make all the old games look fab! without any effort.

Anyone doesn't know what I mean, please look here www.hiend3d.com/hq2x.html

Quote:

Quote: MsxKun & sojerd: Msx is not so bad actually. It needs only some touchs. Most people complain about the 8 sprites / scanline limit. Trust me. Sprite are the wrong way. Forget please! They are only for limited 8 bits machines that could not do quick data transfer . Even the AMIGA had it but almost no-one used sprites HW, because SW sprites with blitter are more and more nice and flexible. I agree that MSX only needs some touchs. I can pass without HW sprites on SC5 and so, but it's more difficult, actually, on SC4. Maybe, one Screen mode thant allows 4bpp on a tile based mode? Like Megadrive. Anyways, if the data transfer is very quick, you can make these tile on SC5 without problems So, I want more vram pages available, then

Having HW scroll register make the scrolling very easier. We do not need of 1GB bandwith data-trasfer... nor sc4 ungly tiles.

however i agree. sc4 should never exists, they have from the beginning implemented a sc5 pattern mode...

Quote:

they have from the beginning implemented a sc5 pattern mode...

regarding speed or regarding ease of use ?

Speed isn't going to cut it on an MSX2, compared to sc2/sc4. Easy of use .. mhoa, dunno, is it so difficult to copy (x,y)-(x+7,y+7) to (dx,dy) ?

Quote:

What about a filter like hq2x ? This would make all the old games look fab! without any effort. Anyone doesn't know what I mean, please look here www.hiend3d.com/hq2x.html

Indeed, this filter can be used in blueMSX and openMSX and it really enhances the visual perspective, especially in full screen with a minimum 1024 x 768 resolution, because in this case blueMSX uses actually the hq3x filter (probably also in openMSX).

Quote:

Quote: What about a filter like hq2x ? This would make all the old games look fab! without any effort. Anyone doesn't know what I mean, please look here www.hiend3d.com/hq2x.html Indeed, this filter can be used in blueMSX and openMSX and it really enhances the visual perspective, especially in full screen with a minimum 1024 x 768 resolution, because in this case blueMSX uses actually the hq3x filter (probably also in openMSX).

Well Hq2x still provides results, but doesn't require monitor type resolutions (okay for TV), requires less calculation. I like this idea for the hardware as it offers an instant improvement for the entire back catalogue of games. A selling point if you needed one

New features... hhmm...
The thing I like about the MSX are the RPG games like the Dragon Slayer, YS, Snatcher series. I have made a PC version of Mopi Ranger but it isnt the same. Thing is, making a PC game on your own is very hard, you need help. Even then, if the game is finished, not much people will ever notice the game. There is always a better looking game.

With the MSX everybody can make good games because of the limitations. But that doesn't have to be a reason NOT to create a MSX 3. I think we should focus on the strong points of the MSX and thats for me 2D games. Just look at handheld consoles, 2D games (platform, RPG's, shoot-em-up) are very populair. Any upgrade would be in the 2D direction. But we need to be creative. I am reading alot of existing upgrades other platforms have, but if we implement those we would be making another computer not a MSX.

My list finaly:

- Beter sound/music chip.
- New screenmodus for optimal 2D games.
- Faster GFX output for more 'active' screens (moving flowers etc).
- Extra chip (or faster existing) to allow more complex AI/Game.
- Extra Basic funtions for the new functions to allow everybody to enjoy it (not only the ASM guys ).

One thing most people have to let go is those extra upgrades they got in the past, like Moonsound etc. If we would ever come up with a new MSX it should have better sound/gfx then those upgrades! Think out of the box BUT keep the MSX spirit (2D games! Easy to make good looking and fun games). I really am convinced most players want good looking 2D games, which explains the huge selling of the new Mario on the DS or the whole pokemon series.