Then run on a newer version of PJ64, don't let a leaderboard stop you. I'm not sure why newer versions aren't allowed, but maybe ask the forums for that game why. They can probably give a technical reason.
Could also get a N64 or Wii with VC and not have to ramble about how certain emulators aren't allowed, when they're already pretty gracious to even allow emulator in the first place. :^) to repost from the dozens of threads about this on the sm64 forum: the newer versions are less accurate than 1.6, simple as that.
He wants to use an xbox controller, so without some jank adapter that's probably a no go. Emulator should be allowed by default, unless it's so bad that games are unplayable. I'm curious what makes newer versions of pj64 less accurate to 1.6, cause last I checked there is no real accurate n64 emulation anyways.
As far as I know from other games that allow PJ64, 1.6 is like the least bad. You’re right that it’s not accurate to a console, at least to any acceptable degree like NES or SNES, but it’s basically as close as you can get. Given that it’s still inaccurate, I think most games tend to have special rules around or separate it out. I believe SM64 separates it out to its own category and I think OOT either bans it for top X% of runs or might hide it by default (I can’t remember).
So it tends to be allowed because it’s the least terrible and is as close to accurate as N64 emulation will find, but it usually gets treated away from an actual console for that reason. Higher versions of PJ64 are even worse and tend to be even less accurate than 1.6 already is, hence why they’re usually banned.
I see, well my initial point still stands that if you prefer to speedrun on newer versions of pj64 go for it, just don't expect your time to be accepted to the leaderboard.
the reason people use 1.6 instead of the uptodate versions is because the newer ones have faster loading times than consoles here is an older video comparing OoT Wii VC and PJ64 2.0
there exist a sm64 pj64 1.6 and 2.x comparison but this is the first one i found
I'd just like to point out that banning a specific version of a plugin based emulator, where every single aspect of the console has it's own set of plugins and where different plugins will interact with other plugins and/or other versions of PJ64 in wildly different ways seems strange, even more funny to me is that judging from the few leaderboards rules I've skimmed none seems to acknowledge that and just tell you to use X version of Y plugin based emulator, with no other precision. I'd also like to point out that the video comparison that was just posted has some glaring issues that put into question the accuracy of what it tries to demonstrate, just take a look at the Vi/s counter in the bottom right, to keep it short and simple this should be 60 or as close to it as possible as this is what it is on the real hardware (I'm fairly sure, older console tend to deviate a tiny bit either slightly under or slightly over that number and TASvideo's ressources on the matter are not verified for N64 http://tasvideos.org/PlatformFramerates.html ) , but in that video it jumps all over the place sometimes up to 78Vi/s which is definitely not how PJ64 2.0 behaves by default Not to mention the choice to compare it to WiiVC (however official it is it's still a very inaccurate emulator ) and not actual hardware, and with obviously very limited comparison points that don't actually show the full picture (specific example here is that the inventory opens faster, but from a quick check from existing runs, under the same conditions N64 opens the inventory faster than WiiVC, but WiiVC is in fact faster overall than N64 for OoT from my understanding)
Honestly I didn't click I just wanted to see if someone actually tested these things. Comparing to WiiVC for accuracy to N64 is hilarious to me. People seem to forget that official emulation is still emulation, and it's often just as flawed, or worse, than unofficial emulation.
Honestly I didn't click I just wanted to see if someone actually tested these things Well if they did the rulesets I've seen show that they either didn't do it well enough, don't care about it to begin with or simply decided to just have an emu category with seemingly strict requirements (aka use the one emulator) to have something that's fair for those who which to compete on emulator with other emulator user (the latter being the most reasonable to me, even if there's still issues with the way it is done in some cases especially lacking basic requirements that are pretty much mandatory to ensure the competition is fair.) Although I get it, actually testing emulators is a long process and you have to make a lot of effort for each individual emulator you test (and it only gets worse once you have plugin based stuff to deal with which is the entirety of N64 emulation more or less) and any accurate emulator usually comes with really high PC requirements and I get that it's less work to tell off the few people that know about emulator complaining about PJ64 1.6 being a dumpster fire than having to deal with potentially every toaster user complaining about their craptop catching fire / the required emulator not running (or not running full speed) because they have a pre-2010 PC etc, and there's also the question of moderating those runs as you need to know where to look for suspicious things and there's a lot more ways one could cheat not even necessarily intentionally. There's also a very high amount of people in many speedrunning communities who "Used ZSNES / Nesticle / Genecyst / Gens / Ultra HLE / pSX etc once and it was awful, so emulators are automatically bad", leading to people simply not wanting to even address the issue on either side, especially for big legacy games.
It honestly wouldn't hurt having something similar to Gambatte-speedrun (meaning a fork of a decently accurate emulator with tools that make it easier for the competition to be fair and that make it easier to moderate emulator runs) for every platform, at-least 5th gen and down, 6th gen is hairy at-best and 7th gen+ is never gonna be a fair comparison to actual hardware due to fundamental design choices in how those are being emulated (aka they completely disregard any limitation the actual hardware has and as such always load faster and run much better than the OG hardware ever could given a powerful enough PC) so people can have at-least a clean baseline, maybe it would also be worthwhile to try and make a guide that covers a few basics of what to look for when dealing with moderating emulator runs and what are ideas you can implement in your ruleset and what they achieve, maybe even a generic ruleset that you can just copypaste for people who don't really want to think about it too hard.
But I'm getting too comfy fighting windmills, so I'm probably gonna stop here.