Very informative post. Would be fantastic to see that information (or an even more complete list) added to something like TCRF for preservation though obviously that's dependent on someone with appropriate knowledge taking the time.
i just looked up the game on TCRF and apparently there are quite a few little diffs between the us and jp versions of chronicles, keep in mind i'm playing on the jp ver so idk how much of these issues i've listed may or may not be present in the us version.
Thanks for the details! Really bummed out about the PS1 version now. It's weird that it turned out like that, considering how solid the PS1 port of Ghouls 'n Ghosts is. That would have me imagine that porting something from a 68K CPU is really easy, but apparently it's not so, if they had to rebuild it from the ground up.
(edit: apparantly PS1 is RISC based. That just makes Capcom's work on GnG really impressive)
i must stress i'm speaking casually / sort of off the record here, i can't say for certain they didn't base the port on the orig source code for the game, it's an educated guess based on 3 factors:
1. first and foremost, to me it's the only logical explanation as to how they could've gotten so many of the (mostly) little details wrong that i've noticed so far.
2. the orig game was programmed by just 2 ppl, the port lists 5 programmers in the credits.
3. from what i've read over the years from interviews with devs and other ppl in the know, game studios (jp ones in particular) were/are notoriously bad at preserving their games and even worse the source code to said games. irem lost the source for r-type 3. sega lost the source code for panzer dragoon saga. capcom lost the source for the gb rockman's. hell, nintendo grabs roms off the internet for their vc releases. and konami, the dev studio in question here, lost the source code for the final versions of sh2 and sh3, and keep in mind that this was at a time when they should've known better and had their shit together, who knows what it was like for them in the 90's.
based on these points imo it's certainly reasonable to assume they either didn't have the source code (likely) or perhaps it was so cumbersome that they decided it would require less effort to start from scratch, or at least from one of their in house game engine templates (for instance, i seem to recall some interview with koji igarashi where he stated that sotn was built using one of these templates).
confirmation of this statement would of course require some level of disassembly between both versions, locating key variables and game logic and then comparing to see if it's roughly the same or not. i'm no expert in this area so i can only speak for myself, but even with access to good tools this would require a fairly large amount of time and dedicated effort to do.
There's no way I'm gonna get the x68k version though. I'm not gonna buy a huge Japanese home computer for just that game, and the game itself is super expensive. Too bad really.
why not emulation?
I'm gonna just play the PS1 game and try to be happy about it :3
don't worry, you'll have a good time, as i said it's still a good game. i'm just saying accuracy wise, like the amount of changes i have to make to how i play and the threats i need to be aware of between versions, this is what makes me say it's bad. there's no real big issues that make me say "fuck this game", it's more like death from a million paper cuts. for example, gng on the megadrive i consider to be a good port b/c i barely have to adjust how i play and what i need to be aware of between versions. really, as long as you pick one and stick to it you'll be fine. also, difficulty wise they're pretty close, tho psx version might be a smidge harder mostly due to things i've already mentioned in my last 2 posts. however, i've only played the first 2 loops on the psx so far so idk how long that may hold true.