tepples wrote:
One reason for emulator detection is to warn users that a game might not work. For example, some versions of LJ65 use the Nesticle-detection code listed on the linked page, and they put up a disclaimer screen styled to fit into Nesticle's UI.
I still don't see how this is effective. You would actually need to do emulator *version* identification for it to be reliable. Blocking a single emulator entirely seems excessive. If the emu author fixes the emulation mistake, someone is going to have to come out with an IPS patch for the ROM anyway (and how do you think that reflects on the author of the game? Definitely not positively, that's for sure).
If this is a commercial game, then put it on the packaging or cart, or better yet, the manual. "Snakeman's NES Emu v1.22 doesn't work with this game". Game authors shouldn't have to "cater" to emulators is what I'm getting at.
tepples wrote:
Another is to warn players that their online score submission codes will be subject to more scrutiny or even disqualification if the game is run in an environment supporting cheating.
Is this really the responsibility of a NES game though? I would think the "online site" that tracks scores has a strict list of requirements. If they permit emulators, that's their own fault/problem, not the games'.
What I'm trying to say is that I think the above two points you've made aren't the responsibility of a NES game to solve. If anything, they border on Nintendo's introduction of copier detection in Super Mario All Stars. Folks are already used to going to an emulator's forum (or more commonly, asking friends/peers) and inquiring as to why game X doesn't work; the process is a social one, leave it as such.
tepples wrote:
koitsu: On Super NES see SA-1 and SDD-1.
These are hardware expansion chips. Carts which have them also contain games (read: code) that utilises them. Let me know if you can take a SA-1 or SDD-1 game and have it still work on the console without said chips in place. :-)