/vr/ - Retro Games

>>2854689
This guy understands. Shaders often try to simulate the wrong thing.

Anyway, this is the most inane thread on a board filled with inanity. So here's my two cents...

Big question to all those "not like it was supposed to be-ers". How the fuck do you know how it was supposed to be? Did Gunpei Yokoi tell you personally? Because it doesn't seem to say much in the developer's manual on the subject besides available resolutions: http://www.romhacking.net/documents/226/

The most common resolution outputted by the SNES is 256x224 (8:7). Other resolutions are available but rarely used.

The NTSC standard recommends a 4:3 resolution ratio.

The rub is these two ratios differ. What gives?

An NTSC frame is composed of 525 scanlines divided into interleaved even and odd fields with 262 and 263 scanlines respectively. These fields are displayed in succession and, taken together, form a full image. The SNES outputs an NTSC signal (fuck yoou PAL!), however under normal operation generates a full image every field, and thus has an effective frame rate of 60Hz (twice that of the NTSC frame rate of 30Hz) at the cost of half the available vertical resolution. The key to unraveling the discrepancy between ratios is remembering the SNES typically has a vertical resolution of 224 scanlines, so to be a valid NTSC signal, the SNES has to pad the unused scanlines with blanks. In other words an accurate SNES image typically has several black lines at the bottom of the image. Although the non-blank display area is typically an 8:7 ratio, the full image is 4:3, and thus the discrepancy evaporates.

That being said, whether you prefer square or rectangular pixels is a matter of taste. Developers went both ways on this issue. The important part is that the non-blank image is fully on screen. CRTs let you adjust the vertical and horizontal offset and scaling, allowing you to adjust the image to your choosing.

Personally me? I'm a square. Fuck what the artists think.