How long will rpcs3 take to finish or get to next step?

Estimates is what I'm looking for. Assuming development stays at X pace for a Y set of time, what is a good estimate of when there will be noticeable improvements?

For example we know that rpcs3 started out with just homebrews up until 2014. Factoring in a stasis development time and upticks and downticks here and there, should anyone expect 2017-2018 to be the the time frame when rpcs3 gets serious (runs a handful of commercial games, can get in-game with many other games and resolves dynarec, etc.?). Just taking a WIILLLD guess here, not trying to create a debate.

Literally impossible to answer. 20 über skilled people could join tomorrow and we would be done in a year. Or not.

That's why I said estimate ... given the factor of commit averages, percent needed to work on, and down and up times, it's very possible to estimate a span of time from which rpcs3 could indeed improve enough to play a greater deal of ps3 games. 20 uber skilled people joining is not realistic, but an estimation based on plenty of observable factors is, namely:

1.Commit averages (Git measures).
2.Work needed to be done (Roadmap).
3.Contributor averages to gain perspective (check Git history).
4.Estimated workload frequency (factoring in overall potential by averages).

I could analyze and try to get a decent guess, and of course not even that is perfect, but estimation is the best tool for the unknown.

I could make a ballpark guess and say that since it took 3 years to reach playable games (of the lowest stock), it will have to take at least three more years, but that would be a wild goose guess with no statistics behind it. I don't know enough of ps3 but I have estimated timeframes for some other projects and they were all wrong, but close enough to give a fair idea. I believe estimations of some sort give a plausible, sensical, determinant, realistic view of this project's future.

If nobody estimated, everything would be a wild guess ... and wild guesses can hurt. Wouldn't you guys be more comfortable going by a measure of "X point in time to see real progress," rather than blindly, aimlessly adding code over years and being enthralled when the next game improves a pinch? To add more "too long; didn't read" to this post, estimating a time can also set a goal that's worth working for, not just coding up in air.

Two things that can make a difference is recompiler and spurs. We don't know the state of this things, it could be done in a few days or a year. When these are commited, especially spurs, you should see the next breaktrough.

There's literally no one who can tell you. People work on it in their free time, this is not some software project where there's employees to give you a rough estimate, we could literally have a break for months with no progress.

I would really like a rule in the forum that an ETA question are disallowed, they contribute nothing and only lead to baseless speculation. While some might find that entertaining, I do not.

It will advance in 2038.

I agree with Bigpet

I close this thread.