Ok, so if it’s translating to a reverse engineered API, it’s emulation. But if it uses the proprietary documentation and does the same exact translation it…wouldn’t be emulation anymore? What part are we saying is being emulated again?
You said it’s emulation because it handles ps5’s graphics APIs and unified memory. I noted that proton is also translating vulkan to another graphics API. You said it’s different because the api we’re targeting is proprietary and needs to be reverse engineered, implying that is the distinction. Right?
So then doesn’t that imply that if we did the same thing, but without needing to reverse engineer anything, it would now be an apples-to-apples comparison with what proton is doing?
Ok, so if it’s translating to a reverse engineered API, it’s emulation. But if it uses the proprietary documentation and does the same exact translation it…wouldn’t be emulation anymore? What part are we saying is being emulated again?
You don’t really need to emulate stuff, you need to reimplement the APIs, and those aren’t well documented, at least not publicly.
I didn’t say anything to that effect
I’m trying to understand, what is being emulated?
You said it’s emulation because it handles ps5’s graphics APIs and unified memory. I noted that proton is also translating vulkan to another graphics API. You said it’s different because the api we’re targeting is proprietary and needs to be reverse engineered, implying that is the distinction. Right?
So then doesn’t that imply that if we did the same thing, but without needing to reverse engineer anything, it would now be an apples-to-apples comparison with what proton is doing?
You asked if proton is doing basically the same thing and I said yes
I then explained why KytyPS5 doesn’t work as well, with issues like the one mentioned in the article
Ah I see. So what makes kytyps5 an emulator given that proton is emphatically not an emulator?