/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10767825
>i'm told it's not the correct resolution for SNES, and it really should be used with at least a 1440p monitor, but it's a satisfactory default for me
Here's the thing about shaders... who's using the shader you choose to play with on your machine? You, and you alone. Accuracy and other people's takes can be helpful, but ultimately the only thing that matters is if it looks good for you, if you like it.

If so, then whatever.

>>10726319
I think having it smooth suffers from the same issue a lot of modern HD 2D titles suffer from, that it looks cheaper for some reason, as if it's some Flash video game from the 2000s where you play on your browser, the CRT look makes everything look way more premium I think, its smooth and you don't get ugly raw pixels, but doesn't feel cheap at all, so it's still ideal really.

>>10631592
I can say, at least from my experience, shaders do look better on a 4K resolution, but 1080p or even 720p can look decent depending on your shader. I'd say just go on RetroArch and start with the 1st shader on the CRT folder, then press M and N on your keyboard to switch to the next one, or back if you want to compare, keep going one by one, I know that at some point you'll find one you like.

>>10574917
I genuinely love this one, it reminds me of my childhood CRTs, or at least how they seemed back then to me, also has a sort of glow which will always be a plus for me... I recommend it.

>>10575952
He looks BASED. I do love his shader, so jokes aside he actually looks like he's a cool GenX-er.

Nobody uses those filters anymore, but the reason why they were so popular was because the masses were taught that
>if you can see the pixels then it means it looks bad!

But raw pixels have become hip for a while now so nobody admits they ever used filters like supersai.

Now the new looking good fad are AI upscales

>>9401125

>>9240849

>>9125923
>>9126076

>>8933480
>>8933464
>>8935913

>>8880943
>>8880898
>>8880967