/vr/ - Retro Games

>>1851321
Yep. And some people prefer right to left. What's your point? Why do you care?

fuck off.

The thing about older games is that they were basically designed with scan lines in mind.

Older (console) games played on newer televisions don't look as good; look too...fake. I've seen a comparison image and a webm that demonstrates this, but I never ended up saving them

>>1851326
Not even OP but even defending left over right in OP pic in any way is fucking retarded.

>b-but muh way the developers intended

>>1851321
OP only a dumb fuck would prefer left to right.

>>1851338
Oh shit, forgot to mention that this is totally different to OP's post, except that the left generally looks more acceptable with scan lines than without.

>>1851341
But who cares?
Play the games however.

>>1851350
No!
Emulated only.

More pics lik OP?

Whether or not you should go hires and filter depends on what the game is trying to present.

If the game is 3d or attempting 3D ala DKC, filtering makes it look better in most cases.

If a game is 2D and has a lower pixel count, filtering just looks blurry or muddy

>>1851358
Alright, man. That's your opinion and I'm okay with it.

>>1851321
>>>/v/257310427

>>1851321
>>1851341

Fuck you. The fact is, I play original copies of games. So yeah, maybe I just prefer to play something the way it was intended. Console and all.

Emulate it and HD the fuck up if you like.

>>1851448
Faggot.

There is literally no argument against rendering 3D games at a higher resolution

except with the playstation where the polygon shifting and dithering look fucking terrible at higher resolutions, but that's not fixed by native resolution either so it's neither here nor there

>>1851554
GTE hack fixes the polygon shifting, so really no excuse.

Seeing all the Chrono Cross models at higher resolution was sweet

no reason not to upscale 3D games. But filters on 2D games are absolutely disgusting. That applies to the guys that purposefully make it look worse too.

>>1851321

>>>/v/

>>1851554
>that's not fixed by native resolution either so it's neither here nor there
It's less noticeable and wobbly at native

>>1851574
>GTE hack fixes the polygon shifting
not fully
i was still getting pretty heavy wobbling and warping despite it being on

>>1851554
>except with the playstation where the polygon shifting and dithering look fucking terrible at higher resolutions, but that's not fixed by native resolution either so it's neither here nor there

Except that higher resolutions make it worse. Instead of being 1 pixel off, it's off by 4 or more.

Run Mednafen in some scenes, then run it in a HLE plugin emualtor at x4 internal resolution. Huge difference.

>>1851574
>GTE hack fixes the polygon shifting,

Reduces. Doesn't remove entirely.

>>1851546
This

>>1851590
>>1851595
Too bad native has the far worse issue of actually being a complete eyesore to look at. I'd rather take the slightly shifting wobbling instead of having to blow up a 320x240 signal to an HDTV

>>1851610
inb4
>get a 1440x900 CRT that weighs 250lbs to play something with shit resolution just to say "i'm playing authentic"

>>1851610

Native looks fine at native resolution. At standard viewing distance the lines are not visible at all.

>there are fucking /v/ refugees that have to make graphics pretty because they don't give a shit about anything else
bottom lel

>>1851617

>exagerations

CRT monitor is like 20 lbs tops.

>>1851610
>320x240
>>1851610
>>1851610

>320x240

I didn't know EVERY playstation 1 game ran at the same resolution as DOOM anon.

>>1851620
>there are /vr/ussians that delude themselves into believing native playstation resolution is acceptable to look at in any way, shape or form

>>1851627
sure, if it's a 12 inch screen.

>>1851321
The shoulder is better on the left than the right. On the right it's jutting out and pointy. The other also goes higher onto his head. The legs also look rounder on the left.

>>1851618
I can still clearly see the low resolution the game is being rendered and bad dithering through the scanlines. You call this a bullshot?

>>1851639

OP is a retard. On the right he's set the resolution to 16:9. The game is stretched. That's why the character model looks distorted.

>>1851627

>Superior darks
>Better colors
>slightly worse resolution
>high refresh rates
>no input lag

What's wrong with CRT's again? If I had the money right now I would buy one again just for some of the older shit I'm still playing from time to time.

Oh no.. your saying I HAVE TO PUT IT ON A DESK and it MIGHT BE HEAVIER? Are you guys really this prejudice towards older monitors?

>>1851632
You're right. some ran at 304x224 or lower even, and some ran at a weird resolution like 512x240. Some even changed resolutions mid-game to accommodate text anon.

Anon. anon. anon. don't you ever fucking question my knowledge of resolutions and framebuffers again anon.

i'll gladly take the right with a perfect GTE hack.

>>1851647
>superior darks
I'll give you that if you're playing Thief. Most people have their gamma turned up playing that anyway.
>better colors
Debatable, doesn't outweight the benefit of a small, light flatscreen
>slightly worse resolution
doesn't even matter if you aren't playing HD games to begin with
>high refresh rates
60 fps looks like 60 fps regardless of what monitor you're playing on
>input lag
This matters with extremely precise rhythm games, and even then the lag is almost completely unnoticeable.

>>1851659
>60 fps looks like 60 fps regardless of what monitor you're playing on
Depends on your refresh rate and the type of monitor, IE LCDs with sample and hold look like absolute dogshit and not 60FPS.

>>1851321
>filters

>>1851610
>Too bad native has the far worse issue of actually being a complete eyesore to look at.
funny you mention that considering i find the wobbly polygons far worse of an eyesore than running the game at native

>>1851680
The only reason you don't see those wobbly polygons is because everything else is blurry and pixelated as fuck.

I'll take crisp, clean models and hi-res textures over pixelated low-res garbage.

>>1851683
>hi-res textures
>implying the textures are anymore high-res

And I'd rather have low-res pixellation than the wobbly shit. Nevermind that half the games I play are all 2D or heavily 2D anyway, so I don't really give much of a shit. Throw on a CRT shader and everything is good.

Only N64 and newer systems actually look good at high-res. PS1, Saturn, and other older systems look like shit.

>>1851683
this. the wobbling is the same no matter what resolution you see it at, it's just that you lose so many details at native that you also happen to miss the wobbling

>>1851692
>I'd rather squint my eyes and play vidya with sunglasses on than with my eyes open

This is you

>>1851701
>I'd rather have my characters jitter like they have Parkinson's and texture warping up the ass than play in a way that mitigates both problems

This is you

>>1851705
Polygons jitter no matter what upscaling or filters you throw on it you fucking pleb. Welcome to playstation emulation.

>>1851712
Except blowing up the resolution increases the jitter due to the way the PS1 does 3D. Congrats on being a fucking moron.

>>1851715
So you'd rather play at the shitty native resoluton with "invisible" jitter than take advantage of your computer's ability to upscale the resolution and see textures in their pristine form. Fair enough.

>>1851729
Yep. And you'd rather upscale the graphics and deal with the jitter for a clearer image.

The important things is, regardless, that we enjoy the video games we're playing.

>>1851659
>Debatable, doesn't outweight the benefit of a small, light flatscreen
Maybe for a spaghetti-armed woman like you. Who the fuck else cares about the weight of a monitor?

>>1851743
Also the bulk. Some people just don't have room or the furniture to handle a monstrosity like a 30" CRT. And again, all for what, a barely noticeable increase in color and darkness quality? CRTs are "outweighed" in benefits by cheaper, lighter, thinner, and generally more aesthetically pleasing flatscreen monitors whether they are LCD or LED.

>>1851729
I would take jitter any day over grainy and blurry stuff, that doesn't jitter but look like voxels revolving around, also being able to read and look at details and stuff that you can't normally appreciate in grainy and blurry def, like for a small example the posters on the wall, on these pics,

>>1851768

>>1851768
>>1851780
>b-but I bet that looks like shit in motion!

Better than looking like shit 100% of the time anyway.

>>1851646
No it's not.

>>1851627
CRTs monitors weigh in at 30-75lbs depending on size and build for between 15-21". Typical 19" being about 45-50 or so.
CRT TVs vary greatly in weight depending on age. Some 27" are like 40-60 lbs and easy to pick up others are more like 60-100lbs. Cabinet, material and build over age makes a significant difference.

>>1851763
>CRTs are "outweighed" in benefits by cheaper, lighter, thinner, and generally more aesthetically pleasing flatscreen monitors whether they are LCD or LED.
That's only really true for people who don't actually care about the image quality. Otherwise they don't end up outweighing them in many cases. Depends on what you're doing and what type of CRT.

>>1851692
>Saturn
Not true, saturn polygons don't wobble like playstation although saturn 3D looks like shit to begin with

>>1851741
Yes I would deal with jitter than can be reduced if it meant a better picture. I can't believe there are people who argue otherwise. playstation textures are simply too detailed to run the game at native resolution and miss a bunch of details that can't be seen due to resolution

/vr/ is all about muh authenticity even if it looks objectively worse.

>>1851812

>>1851819

>>1851812
>making wide-sweeping generalizations
>implying everyone even agrees with that
>implying an opinion on something subjective can be objective
>emulation is metioned
>clearly against authenticity regardless of native res
>plenty of people who like the enhanced 3D
>caring either way what other people do
>implying implications
>2014

>>1851812
/vr/ is about playing video games in their best possible condition. purists can get fucked

>>1851829
Then why is /vr/ against upscaled textures that clearly and objectively look better, as in OP pic?

>>1851831
because some people don't like the way the games look in motion due to faults of the PS1 hardware

a better question is why give a shit?
even better is why are people still posting in a clearly b8 thread that was posted in /v/ at the same time

>>1851831
>upscaled textures
Nothing is upscaled. He's simply rendering at a higher resolution and therefore showing more details that are missed in a lower resolution

Real console connected to a CRT with RGB is best.

>>1851812
I usually balance both. In many cases authentic look is the better look. For the PSX, native res is generally preferable because of artifacts the pseudo 3d generates when res bumped.

>>1851838
>b-but now I can actually see the polygons wobbling that I couldn't see before because everything was muddy pixels

Can someone post a webm of this shit so they can see it? Shit still visibily wobbles, just "not as much" because the resolution is so poor you can barely tell what you're looking at anyway.

>>1851840
>Real console
Nope. a PSX is the absolute worst way to play PSX games

>>1851321
Be mature and let people play however they want.

/v/ culture ladies and gentlemen.

>>1851847
>you can barely tell what you're looking at anyway.
maybe if you're blind

I could really care less honestly. As long as the game is fun.

>>1851847
What the hell are you talking about? I'm in FAVOR of increasing the resolution since the benefits far outweigh seeing the imperfections which can be mitigated anyways

>using HLE PSX emulators
>2014

Enjoy your inaccuracies.

>>1851856
I know, I was simply simulating a reply from a dissenter.

>>1851867
>using any emulators
>2014

>>1851867
>believing accuracy is discernible

>>1851867
>Using LLE PSX emulators
>Instead of a modchipped PSX, a PS2, PSP or PS3
Enjoy your inaccuracies

>>1851321
When did /vr/ turn into /v/?

>>1851876
>a PS2, PSP or PS3

Mednafen PSX is probably more accurate than any of these.

All of those have games that don't work on them.

>>1851876
>modchipping your systems
>modchipping a PSP
>playing copies
>not playing the authentic, original games

>>1851879
/vr/ is just /v/ when it's older. Same douchebag, just older.

>>1851882
>>not playing the authentic, original games

There's nothing special about that. You're playing the exact same data.

>>1851887
>There's nothing special about that
Wow, look at this fucking pleb.

>>1851887
>muh intangible superiority

That's all he means, anon.

>>1851882
>actually buying PSX games
Don't do that

>>1851891
>muh intangible superiority
Considering I'm playing my legally obtained copies of games on the original system with my old tube television connected via coaxial cable and not some shady rom ISO burned into a CDRW, I'd say my superiority is quite tangible.

>>1851882

Your "authentic, original games" are copies too dipshit.

Unless you own an unripped prototype...

>>1851904
>Your "authentic, original games" are copies too dipshit.
Legal copies that I bought and are official. Unlike some peoples' games.

>>1851890

You're one of those people who thinks he's hot shit because he owns a lot of games, aren't you?

Protip: most people don't give a shit about collecting, just playing the fucking games.

>>1851912
>most people don't give a shit about collecting
And that's why they're objectively inferior to me.

>>1851898

Nobody gives a shit whether a game was "legally obtained" or not, that's just moralfaggot wankery.

> not some shady rom ISO burned into a CDRW,

If you use disc images that are verfied against a database of known good dumps (Redump, etc.) and use quality CD-R media burned by a decent burner, there should be 0 difference.

Nice try, but your game collection is worthless outside of sentimental value really.

>graphics whore
>retro gamer

pick one.

>>1851916
This

>>1851916
>Nobody gives a shit whether a game was "legally obtained" or not
And that's why they aren't true gamers.

>If you use disc images that are verfied against a database of known good dumps (Redump, etc.) and use quality CD-R media burned by a decent burner, there should be 0 difference.
Aside from the fact that it's not official and isn't the true, intended way of playing the game. Nevermind that there's no reliable way to make game copies outside of illegally modifying your systems, ruining the true experience even more.

You're just mad that I'm right.

>>1851915

>"collectors" who waste their time and money thinking they're superior to anyone

Pfthahahaha

>>1851918
Why not both? If you can visibly and objectively improve an old games graphics with little to no caveats, why the fuck not? Your only argument is literally
>muh authenticity

>>1851921
Great response. Glad you contributed to the conversation.

>>1851898
>old tube television connected via coaxial cable

Why not use a Sony PVM with RGB output?

>>1851924
>objectively
There's that word again.

>>1851341
Opposing it is equally as autistic and retarded. You're actually arguing over preference but what's worse is you're arguing over someone else preference.
>NO STOP PREFERRING THE THING I DON'T

>>1851927
Because that's the way I played them when they were new. That's the only way to play them. Any alternatives are wrong.

>>1851925

Yeah, because saying someone is "objectively inferior" to you really contributes to the conversation.

It was over before it began, everyone is just laughing at you.

>>1851916
You forgot about monetary value you knw.

>>1851920

OK, you're just trolling, I get it.

I feel dumb for falling for this.

>>1851928
Refer to OP pic, it looks "objectively" better on the right than the left.

pic related

>>1851932

They won't be worth shit when they begin decaying.

>>1851931
>Yeah, because saying someone is "objectively inferior"
They are, though. This thread clearly proves that.

>It was over before it began, everyone is just laughing at you.
It was never over.

>>1851934
>I must be trolling because I have a different opinion
Wow, you must be fun to disagree with

>>1851935
Both are wrong anyway because they're both emulated.

>>1851932
that is not being a collector that is being a merchant so don't call yourself a collector please

>>1851942
If you're not trolling, you're batshit insane

I'm just giving you the benefit of doubt.

>>1851942
Whatever dude, we get it, you're so cool for owning the actual copy. So while you search amazon and ebay and local mom and pop video game stores for $80 dusty old PlayStation discs, we'll be downloading ROMs for free in 1/100th the amount of time that play exactly the same and look and run better on PC with an emulator.

>>1851941
I'm not even him and I don't have much of a collection, but it's hard to say. Some old shit really increases in value. It just depends if video games will stay a popular hobby, or retro games in particular.
There will probably be a point when the people who originally played the games are all dead and the value goes down somewhat.

Since when did /vr/ become /v/?

>>1851950
to add to this you can just output from the pc to a TV using a software render and hacks to your videocardso everything looks identical,

>>1851949
>I'm just giving you the benefit of doubt.
And what did you learn from this?

>>1851950
>Whatever dude
It's not "whatever". This is serious.
Go back to playing Final Fantasy VIII.

>you're so cool for owning the actual copy
Thank you for noticing.

>So while you search amazon and ebay and local mom and pop video game stores for $80 dusty old PlayStation discs
I don't need to search because I actually bought an owned the games when they were relevant, unlike you underaged assholes.

>we'll be downloading ROMs
That's illegal, you know

>in 1/100th the amount of time
Not on your Argentinian internet speeds.

>that play exactly the same
Playing PS1 games with a keyboard is nowhere near the same. Get the fuck out.

>look and run better on PC with an emulator
Except they don't do either of those things.

>>1851950
Don't forget the discs will eventually fail. Might not be for another 10 years, or even 20, but eventually CD-ROMs degrade past the point of readability.

>>1851959
>to add to this you can just output from the pc to a TV
That's now how PCs work. Clearly you know nothing about hardware.

>>1851965
>That's illegal, you know

Kill yourself you fucking moralfag.

>Playing PS1 games with a keyboard is nowhere near the same. Get the fuck out.

Now we all know you're trolling. Goodbye.

>>1851970
>Don't forget the discs will eventually fail.
Maybe if you're playing some Chinese rom burned copy. My official discs will still be working. Good job, losers.

>>1851965
Yeah anyone who disagrees with you about anything are all underaged Argentinians with slow internet connections and no USB controllers aka strawmen.

>>1851976
CD-Roms don't last forever. 30 years max.

>>1851975
>Kill yourself
Wow, that's incredibly rude. Suicide is a serious issue. No wonder you're a pirate if you're such a terrible person. Glad to be better than you.

>Now we all know you're trolling. Goodbye.
Again, there's that word "trolling." First of all, I don't even fish. Secondly, I'm just disagreeing with you. Stop being an asshole.

>Yeah anyone who disagrees with you about anything are all underaged Argentinians with slow internet connections and no USB controllers
Well, of course. Who else would disagree with me?

You forgot to add the words "pirate" and "inferior" in there somewhere.

>>1851984
>CD-Roms don't last forever.
And that's whey you should always buy the official versions of games.

>>1851881
>PS2
>has original PS1 hardware inside
>emulator is more accurate than that

>literally any Sony console
>Sony engineers having access to all of that info about PS1 hardware and how everything works
>Autists who reverse-engineer games in order to find out how PS1 works can make PS1 emulation anyhow better
Whatever makes your dick hard anon.

>>1851984
It's funny that backups (hopefully with a way to verify hashes) will outlast all the physical media, if any of it survives that is.

I swear, you emulator fags probably have more fun fiddling with your emulators and posting troll threads than you do playing the actual game

>>1851992
I thought the PS2 was software to some degree due to having the Deus bug in Xenogears that emulators are notorious for having.

>>1851997
Anon, the only way to backup these games is to CD-ROMs (note the rom in the title). If they fail, how can they be backed up?

>>1851992

PS2 has more of an "official clone" of the PS1. It is not exactly the same as the PS1 and as such, certain games do not work on it.

And yes, POPS is not 100% accurate either, it has games that don't work.

Mednafen PSX is probably at least on level with those now, though it needs considerably modern CPUs (Core 2 2.00ghz or more) to run fullspeed

>>1852007
>ore 2 2.00ghz or more
Ridiculous. Who would want to emulate with they're so inefficient? The original games ran at 3.7 MHz.

Another point for playing the original games on the original hardware.

>>1852004
I meant the back ups on people's computers. Hard drives don't last forever either, but if people keep sharing the disc images with each other to play the games they should survive.

>>1851991
>And that's whey you should always buy the official versions of games.
What?

>>1852023
Just report and hide.

>>1852017
Oh, okay.

>>1852023
Well, obviously, if you aren't using illegal CD "ROMs" than there' shouldn't be any issues.

>>1851991

>>1852015

>I don't know shit about emulation

>>1852015
>The original games ran at 3.7 MHz.
I thought PS1 was more in the neighborhood of 30MHz. Also, it's got dedicated hardware for triangle rasterization, video decoding, fixed-point vector math, and probably some other crap I'm forgetting. Of course you don't need a 2GHz CPU to just emulate the PSX CPU. There's more to it than just a MIPS core though.

>>1852032
That's a really neat fish, but I don't undestand what that has to do with anything.

>>1852035
Why would I need to when I can play the games in their superior format on the original system?

>>1852028
>Well, obviously, if you aren't using illegal CD "ROMs" than there' shouldn't be any issues.
Do you think pressed discs are immune to laser rot? They oxidize just like CD-Rs - albeit a bit slower.

>>1851971
>plug my computer to CRT through S-video port
>use scanline filters to make up for the lack of 240p
Apparently it is how PC hardware works. kill yourself

This is the worst trolling I've ever seen on /vr/

You all should be ashamed of yourselves for falling for this

>>1852041
I'm not even going to respond to this with shitposting because I'm getting bored and I want to go play video games, but you're probably correct. I was pulling specs I could barely remember out of my ass. From what I can see around google, yeah, it's around 30MHz.

Anyway, the conversation seems to be less about arguing preference now and is actually getting serious/technical, so I'm going to go emulate some SNES games.

>>1852049
>>plug my computer to CRT through S-video port
>>use scanline filters to make up for the lack of 240p

Don't do that, that just gives you ultra flickery 30hz 240p.

Just use a computer CRT monitor if you're going to use a scanline filter for 240p.

>>1851965
Haha what a massive faggot. I bet he's sitting there in his faggot game room huffing an inhaler in anger.

>>1851321
>left PSX version
>right alternate universe N64 version

>>1852007
>PS2 has more of an "official clone" of the PS1. It is not exactly the same as the PS1
I/O processor:
CPU Core: Original PlayStation CPU (MIPS R3000A clocked at 33.8688 MHz or 37.5 MHz)

It isn't anyhow different, literally just about 5 PS1 games do not quite work while the rest works without any problems. That is if you exclude the slim model which has problems running even PS2 games.

>>1852047
>2014
>still believing hoax about laser rot

>>1851574
>GTE hack fixes the polygon shifting, so really no excuse.

No, it only removes z-collissions. It can't fix "wobbly" polygon models because all the games run in fixed point math, and you cannot magically upscale numbers to be more precise.

And it may even make things worse since polys are now off by more pixels as you increase the resolution.

The wobbly polygons aren't as visible in original resolution due to the resolution being so slow, by the way. It masks a lot of imperfections. Dreamcast was about the first console where you could do non-shit looking 3d graphics that didn't wobble or had 4x4 pixel textures stretched to an entire wall.

>>1851801
>Not true, saturn polygons don't wobble like playstation although saturn 3D looks like shit to begin with

It depends entirely on the game, they can wobble too. But most of the better 3d games are all made in such a way as to not have this problem.

As for Saturn having shit 3d, I agree that in general the Saturn had the least powerful 3d hardware, but please give me a Playstation game that looks as good as VF2 or Dead or Alive or Athlete Kings and runs in high resolution like they do.

I remember when /vr/ wasn't /v/.

3D games are one thing, but can we all agree that filtering 2D graphics is a crime against humanity?

Look at this shit. Only a massive hipster would want their modern monitor to look like an old CRT.

>>1852162
No, fuck you.

>>1852162
that actually looks great to me. low resolution 2D graphics don't scale well at all to modern flatscreens and I think scanline filtering helps with the appearance

when dealing with higher resolution graphics like those found on the CPS3 i think that HQx filtering looks better than running it at it's native resolution. The only reason these kinds of filters look like shit is because it's used on a low resolution game. Jojo looks phenominal with it

I like this filter, personally.

>>1851578
A filter doesn't need to ruin the original art. There are regular upscaling filters like bicubic or jinc.

>>1852178
Here's an example of what I'm talking about.

I want /v/ to leave

>>1852138
>nothing but circlejerking CRTs all day long and talking about filters and emulation

What's changed?

>>1851991
>>1851991
>>1851991
>>1851991
>>1851991
>>1851991

>>1851321

This is one of the worst threads I've seen in years. This is basically what everyone is arguing about-

>>1852302

And this is what the other side is arguing about

>>1851321

If the game's original textures are detailed enough such that higher resolution reveals details never shown clearly on the original platform, then I play it in higher resolutions.

If the textures were low-detail such that a high resolution does nothing except show how bland they are, I prefer the original console's low resolution

>>1851991

>>1851321
>hi-res
great
>filtered
totally unnecessary, scanline filters look like shit and blurring filters look even worse
>b-b-but they were designed with scanlines in mind!
Yes, and your computer was not. It's not a fucking CRT.

>>1852328
the filtering in the OP pic refers to texture filtering. playstation textures are unfiltered.

>>1852330
I'm not referring to OP's picture specifically

>>1851321
>>1851321
Unless it's interest in experiencing something in it original format -- which has merit -- I don't believe you.

I prefer playing on my CRT through s video, component or even composite for genesis and NES. Nostalgia is a big factor in retro gaming. I tried to play some games like Majora's mask and other gamecube games through emulation with filtering, upscale high res etc on my 47 inch HD LED tv. Didn't like the modern feel and my old crt with systems set up gets way more play. I save the HD and ultra graphics for new games. But I can see how younger people would not be able to get into the old technology as they weren't alive during the glory days of sitting in front of the tube with a wired controller and not worrying about every little graphical detail, just playing the game for what it is ( not for graphics).

>>1851574
>GTE hack fixes the polygon shifting, so really no excuse.
Fucking hardly.

>>1851321
Left is better. But then i play on a crt via RGB so it actually looks shitloads better than both of those examples.

I have no strong feelings on this matter, but read this thread, anyway.

This thread reads like a bunch of people angrily and pointlessly writing out their personal preference on something, then creating unnecessary conflict over other people having a different preference.

To top it off, this guy is clearly trolling, yet keeps getting engaged.

>>1851920
>>1851915
>>1851930
>>1851965

>>1851915
enjoy your hoarding bro, but do let a shrink know when it gets out of hand, don't want ya to end up on one of em TV shows

>>1851367

for context, this post was linking to a /v/ thread which had the exact image and wording this thread's OP had

http://boards.deniableplausibility.net/v/thread/257310427

I'm surprised this thread is still alive

>>1851627

Either you're a troll, or you're a 12-year old summerfag who has no fucking clue what the hell a CRT is.

I had a 21'' CRT monitor for 8 years; it was an awkwardly-sized 75lb (at least) beast, and carrying it into Best Buy from the back of a huge parking lot to be recycled was not a very pleasant experience

>>1852456
>75 pounds

do you even lift

>>1851659
>This matters with extremely precise rhythm games, and even then the lag is almost completely unnoticeable

I had to completely relearn my lines on NFS when I switched to an LCD. The lag was horrible.

And when I set it back up on a CRT, it was like playing the fastest game ever.

>>1852507

>filename

Heh

Guide to using filters/resolution mods:
Pixels - NO
Polygons - YES

Are the "hi-res" textures actually just part of the game, or are they some fan-made trash?

Because if it's the latter, fuck that noise

>>1852561
without adding a patch, it's just the emulator resizing and smoothing it out

>>1852560
Whoops!

OH NO! People have different tastes! Such a crime!

Nice /v/ containment thread :^)

Sage and hide /vr/ros!

>but I want to discuss my CRT ;-;
>>1817069
Or make a new fucking general

>but this is le valid retro vidya discussion ;-;
Sure.
>le ebin TOP LEL mem in OP
>stop enjoying things i enjoy in a different way than i enjoy them
>downloading ROMs is illegal/blatant trolling
>DYEL
This thread is shit, and you should feel bad for shitposting on one of the few good boards left on this chan

>>1852671
Keep saying that you are the good guys, but in reality when grainy psx pics or unfiltered screenshots are posted nobody says a thing and the instant a psx on hi res or filtered picture appears you fags go all batshit crazy and have to point it out and start with your memes "looking good" "filters" "like the developers intended", almost nobody complains more than these people and it is they who have that "stop liking what i don't like" complex

>>1852671
never seen so much shitposting at once

>>1853067
It's just the same guy ruining it for everyone else.
I bet he doesn't even like games.

and then he wobbles away

>>1853130
yeah, polygon wobbling doesnt look so bad in low res for some reason.

>>1852529
Sounds like you had a shit LCD then.

>180 posts omitted

Fucking hell /vr/

>>1851956
I can't give you a specific date, but I've been seeing the slow decline all year as the board just progressively gets more and more elitest less tolerent or understanding of other people being able to have fun in a different way.I don't think /v/r is a lost cause though, we just to counter this kinda of bullshit with more positive threads.

>>1853163
>yeah, polygon wobbling doesnt look so bad in low res for some reason.

That's because the resolution of the screen is lower than the precision of the math moving those polygons.

The Playstation had neither the floating point math nor the z-accurate mapping to draw polygons. It was just fast enough to approximate it via fixed point math, and had a dedicated piece of hardware that did affine mapping, and a fast framebuffer to plot the flat triangles to.

It was the only way to make a console capable of playing Virtua Fighter (which was THE design goal) for less than 300$ in 1994.

>>1851321
>>>/vg/emu

>>1852460

>awkwardly-sized

Not heavy by any sense of the word, but a lack of a good grip made it really fucking annoying to tote around.

>>1852342
>Nostalgia is a big factor in retro gaming.
Too bad /vr/ isn't about nostalgia, it's about playing old games in 2014 in the best way possible, hence the use of PVMs, RGB connections and emulation

>>1851904
>Unless you own an unripped prototype...

Ripping a prototype doesn't make its original a copy.

>>1852074
Metal oxidizing isn't a hoax. If you keep your shit in a swamp, it's going to "rot."

However, eventually it will actually affect properly kept discs. We won't be alive to see it, though.

>>1851647
>slightly worse resolution

Wut? I'm running my CRT at 1800x1440 at 60hz right now. Most HDTVs won't go over 1080 vertical pixels.

epic thread

jesus christ this thread is still going from yesterday?

>>1852074
>5 PS1 games do not quite work while the rest works without any problems. That is if you exclude the slim model which has problems running even PS2 games.

You're going to have to elaborate on that. I've had a few different PS2s, fat and slim, since the year it came out. I've never once had a game that didn't play or even had bugs. I've read the Wiki list of games that are supposed to be incompatible, and all the ones I had worked 100%. At least one of them was from the "incompatible with all PS2 models" list.

>>1851915
>objectively inferior to me
>to me
That would make it subjective then you mong.

>>1854128
>Ripping a prototype doesn't make its original a copy

In the context of prototypes, the "original" is the CDR the developer themselves burned.

And then you have assholes who buy spindles of company branded CDRs so they can burn repros of such prototypes from the publically released isos.

>>1851321
Fully 3D games are unquestionably better in moderately higher resolutions, but it depends a lot on the game. Also, 2D huds in those games always look terrible and occasionally broken when internal resolution is arbitrarily increased.

It's not as black and white as you make it out to be. On your particular screenshot, right is unarguably superior to left, but that is not always the case, especially in games that use a lot of 2D, like games with 2D sprites on 3D backgrounds (e.g. Xenogears) or 3D characters on 2D backgrounds (e.g. Final Fantasy VII). Those games often look better in original internal resolutions.

>>1854205
What's the significance of the original though? Why do people care about the origin of the media instead of the data itself?

>>1854219
Fetishism, ignorance and/or low level of intelligence. The same reason people occasionally prefer paper over digital screen, disregarding the text in favour of tactile experience. Or 30 FPS over >30 FPS

>>1854216
>Fully 3D games are unquestionably better in moderately higher resolutions,

Playstation games were all affine mapped 2d games though. The machine had no 3d hardware, other than the GTE which handled affine mapping the software-transformed 3d objects.

That is why increasing the resolution in PS1 emus always give shit results.

First game console with actual 3d hardware was the N64, as I recall.

>>1854226
But paper is actually much easier on your eyes than staring into lights, and it's much easier to get comfortable with a book than a computer or phone.

>>1854181
Not him, but what was the region of those games? Also keep in mind that there is like 15 hardware revisions where each of them added/removed/changed something, classifying all of them just as fat and slim as Wiki does is quite ineffective, considering that sometimes stuff just gets broken for no reason from one revision to another and passes to final production where it's up to end-user who finds that something is wrong.

>>1854216
Don't forget that the texture quality won't magically raise with the amount of pixels, if it doesn't use a simple texture (like Crash's body), then it will probably look like shit.

>>1854238
E-ink or whatever it's called isn't really any harder on the eyes. I don't own one of them but you don't have much of an argument there anymore.

>>1854236
That's above my head, so I can't argue with that properly. But the fact is, higher internal resolutions in PSOne games are possible and look good with the absence of what I understand as 2D objects.

Are you sure PSOne had no real 3D? As I understand your post, it did not have hardware 3D. It was software, is all. Rather, as I understand it, it did not have 2D, as all 2D on it was textures on polygons. Am I getting this right?

>>1854238
>But paper is actually much easier on your eyes than staring into lights
Now that's poppycock. A good screen is much less reflective, and adjustible backlight is much easier on the eyes that natural light on paper. Also, on a good screen with a good reader type is always perfect (as opposed to print), and font size is adjustable.

>>1854252
>Don't forget that the texture quality won't magically raise with the amount of pixels
A lot of PSOne games had gradients anyway. Also, there's texture filtering, that works adeuately well. See OP picture, for example: textures are good enough for a much higher internal resolution. Similarly, PS2's FFXII had great textures that didn't blur even at triple the internal res. Depends a lot on the game.

>>1854262
PSX hardware is somewhere between 2D and 3D - neither is 'real', just approximated. N64 was real 3D.

>>1854286
In what way isn't it real? It's plain old software 3D, isn't it?

>>1854305
Yes, but without accurate perspective

>>1851448
>the way it was intended
>implying that the developers specifically intended against higher-resolution displays as a principled creative decision, rather than due to the reality of consumer electronics in their time, and that this alleged intent further extends to cover various means of upscaling of their product on future display technologies

kiki

>>1851321
bait

>>1854313
That I know. It's called the Z-buffer, which PSOne lacks. That doens't make it not 3D, though. Correct?

Anyway, am I arguing with someone with actual technical understanding of the hardware in question or are you like me?

>>1854324
You're right, but... this looks just awful. Holy shit, that's ugly. It's like I'm 17 again, discovering ZSNES and Super Eagle for the first time.

>>1854252
They were all NTSC. Didn't even think about PAL versions having issues. I don't think it was specified on the wiki.

>>1852162
>>1852198

There really needs to be made a distinction here. I can't take it anymore. Every time somebody talks about CRT SHADERS that aim to simulate realistic scan lines, some fucking jerk off cries about MUH FILTERS and posts one of those terrible interpolated smoothing algorithm abortions.

Those are two completely different things and it fucking kills me when people bunch them together under the umbrella of "filters". Fucking words, how do they work?

shader=/=filter

filter: a horrible crime against humanity that produces a pitiful blob of crying colors

shader: an attempt to recreate the positive effects a CRT monitor has on pixlated images

>>1855000
>CRT filtering
>Scale2x shader
maybe you should learn exactly what filter and shader mean before you post again, because they are both filters. Just that one filter uses an algorithm that smooths out pixels and the other filter uses multiple shaders to replicate the effects of a CRT

>>1854337
Yes, correct. Don't let that nintoddler jerk you around. PSX had real 3D, of course.

>>1855000
Uh....no. You're right about CRT filters/shaders vs. upscaling filters/shaders, but the difference between a filter and a shader is much more technical and has nothing to do with the appearance of the final product.

Filters are done by the CPU and affect everything uniformly; shaders are done by the GPU and operate on a per-pixel basis. Filters were more common before RetroArch because a given emulator would always be dealing with the same resolutions. You couldn't put a SNES filter on a PSX emu and expect it to display properly, but an openGL shader will work on basically any graphics you apply it to.

>>1855013
Right, that's what I meant.

Algorithm smoothing "filter" is bad.

CRT scanline replicating shader "filter" good.

What we need to get away from is calling both things simply "filter" and pretending they are in any way similar. Any idea how to discern those things so people stop putting them in the same boat?

PS1 had part of its hardware dedicated to plotting polygons or some such, not "real" 3D acceleration.

>>1855026
Cool, thanks for explaining the technical side of it.

Do you have any idea how to linguistically separate the ones that aim to blend out pixels into smooth lines and the ones that try to replicate a CRT display?

Those are two vastly different things and you can't say one is bad because the other looks like shit.

>>1855038
>>1855028
CRT shader. just say that.

>>1851361
Filtering prerendred graphics looks terrible, especially on a game with gritty visuals like Doom.

>>1855049
I think zdoomgl has an option to only filter the textures, leaving the sprites.

>>1854262
>Are you sure PSOne had no real 3D?

Yes. It did all 3d in software, then fed it to the GTE which translated all the 3d coordinates to 2d ones. I'm not sure if it did sorting as well or if you had to do that in software too. Then the gpu drew a bunch of flat triangles according to those coordinates into a framebuffer, which was the final display.

Because of this you had no per-pixel z buffer, and all polygons were "stretched" to their shape instead of being rotated and transformed into their proper perspectives. It also used fixed point math, so lots of polygon wobbling as the precision was just too low (not a problem when your display is 320x224, but huge deal when you run it in an emu in 1080p).

The Playstation had some 3d functionality, but the gpu was a dead simple 2d plotter, albeit an extremely efficient one. It worked the same way as the VDP1 in the Saturn, it was just 2-3x faster, could draw triangles, had higher colour depth, suffered from no pixel overdraw, and had 4 useful transparency modes instead of the Saturns one (not counting shadowing). On the other hand, the Saturn had a dedicated background tilemap display unit, which was the ONLY reason the Saturn was better at 2d games - in pure sprite pushing, the Playstation could leave the Saturn in the dust. But it had to also draw the backgrounds with "sprites" as well, which slowed things down considerably.
Also the Saturn had to do all transformation in software, which was very dependent on how well it was coded. I'd say that at peak efficiency using all the CPUs, the Saturn could transform polygons as fast as the Playstation - but it still had a very slow and inefficient gpu, which simply couldn't draw the polygons as fast.

>>1855062
Still looks like shit. All you have to do is decrease brightness. The Doom sprites look great when they are dark enough so that there's some black on them. When they are too bright, they just look like total shit though.

>>1854337
>That I know. It's called the Z-buffer, which PSOne lacks. That doens't make it not 3D, though. Correct?

Z-Buffer is per-pixel depth information.

What I meant was that the gpu was entirely 2d. When it was drawing polygons, it just rotated/stretched the textures, and drew them into a buffer like that.

The machine did 3d in software, used a coprocessor to transform it to 2d, and drew it to framebuffer like that.

>>1855065
>>1855089
In the end the ps1 had higher polycount, better framerate and was easier to develop for than the n64 so the gpu acceleration was really only good for tech demos and in the beginning of the gen, for launch titles.

>>1851321
RIGHT

>>1855065
Pretty much what Doom did.

>>1855102
Yeah, the PS1 was the most efficient machine of the generation. Plus Sony gave all the developers crazy good deals, and had a very efficient distribution system already in place.

N64 could've kicked its ass graphically, if Nintendo released proper documentation from the start instead of locking in devs into their own shit microcode. They didn't.

Saturn only looked better if you could get the background gpu to offload the graphics. That was the machines greatest strength, hence all the very good 2d ports. But 3d games also took advantage of it, sometimes in a very impressive manner (for ex. Sonic R, Burning Rangers, Last Bronx, all the Panzer Dragoons, Radiant Silvergun even.). You could use the VDP2 to do kickass water effects too, but it was problematic to set it up for that in an all-3d environment.

>>1855109
More like Quake, actually. Doom was a raycaster.

>>1855139
Doom actually used binary space partitioning, but in a way that didn't allow for room over room. Duke3D used raycasting though.

>>1855102
>ps1 had higher polycount
In like-for-like situations (inaccurate 3D) the N64 has three times the polygon count of the PS1. 99% games use the default high-accuracy microcode though.
>better framerate
What does this mean exactly? Framerate is software dependent. Both N64 and PS1 have 60fps games...
>gpu acceleration was really only good for tech demos and in the beginning of the gen, for launch titles.
It's also good for having 3D graphics that don't wobble around and textures that don't randomly change their angle

>>1855139
>shit microcode
I'd argue the word for the default microcode isn't "shit" but "poorly chosen". It was provided to Nintendo by SGI (who were at the time the world's foremost 3D graphics experts).

Unfortunately their code was designed for simulations or rendering farms (where accuracy is important) not gaming (where accuracy is much less important). PS1 rendering is way too inaccurate, so N64 was on the right track in that regard, but they went overboard because at that resolution you can barely tell.

>>1851321
it's all cool OP, until you start playing and things start moving. even GTE accuracy hack doesn't help much.

sometimes it's just better to play the game it was meant to be played.

>>1851578
textures made for specific resolution will not look any better and may make things worse.

there are few games that benefit a lot from upscaling, though. mostly because they weren't designed with that strict limitations in mind.

>>1851627
i bought a professional 21" crt display at a bargain at one point. It was well over 25kg. feel free to convert that into freedum units.

>>1851876
there is little point of using ps2 for psx games. virtually zero benefit, and you still need the original memcards (unless you use POPS).

limited compatibility and nearly zero improvements.

even ps3/psp is better, even though psp has to emulate certain buttons in finicky ways.

>>1855867
>limited compatibility
>PSX on PS2
what the fuck am i reading

>>1851918
as if people in early days of given systems did not care about graphics.

>>1851992

clearly you did not try playing multi-disc psx games in ps2, or ones with more sophisticated disk protection mechanisms.

>>1855867
>limited compatibility and nearly zero improvements.
>PS2 having original PS1 hardware inside
>literally less than 5 games reported not working
>not counting faster disc speeds -> reduced loading times
Guys, looks like we've got an expert right there

>>1851627
>CRT monitor is like 20 lbs tops.
Yeah, maybe for a 17" monitor.

My 36" Toshiba CRT weighed over 200pounds. And my 22" NEC CRT monitor weighed 65pounds. That little fucker weighed so much, it actually caused the top of my desk to warp.

>>1856127
17-inch is big enough really

>>1855873
pretty much only thing left intact was original ps1 cpu, and using it as main cpu in ps1 mode locked out everything else that ps2 could provide to make emulation better, e.g. extra data caching in ram, advanced GS effects, maybe using ps2 mc, hdd or usb for saves, etc.

Some of that was implemented in POPS-0001 emulator later, but it was never relased outside of PSBBN channel.

> 5 games not working

bitch, please : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_games_incompatible_with_PlayStation_2

even some ps2 games were incompatible with some ps2 units (early star ocean 3 release, for instance)

>>1851659
>This matters with extremely precise rhythm games, and even then the lag is almost completely unnoticeable.

What about FIGHTAN

>>1856281
As for PS2 compatibility, see
>>1852074
>It isn't anyhow different, literally just about 5 PS1 games do not quite work while the rest works without any problems. That is if you exclude the slim model which has problems running even PS2 games.
>>1854181
>I've had a few different PS2s, fat and slim, since the year it came out. I've never once had a game that didn't play or even had bugs. I've read the Wiki list of games that are supposed to be incompatible, and all the ones I had worked 100%. At least one of them was from the "incompatible with all PS2 models" list.
>>1854252
>Also keep in mind that there is like 15 hardware revisions where each of them added/removed/changed something, classifying all of them just as fat and slim as Wiki does is quite ineffective

I like how people are talking about native resolution "looking like shit". It's a fucking PS1, game, what do you expect?
Maybe if you can't handle the way older games look and don't have enough imagination to fill in the gaps yourself, you belong over here:

>>>/v/

>>1856281
Bullshit. I have a SCPH-90004 and I can play Tombi! just fine, letting the intro sequence play and all.

>>1855853
>In like-for-like situations (inaccurate 3D) the N64 has three times the polygon count of the PS1. 99% games use the default high-accuracy microcode though.

Nintendo didn't allow devs to use any other microcode, in fact didn't even document that they exist, so as far as all but a select few developers were concerned, the N64 was not that much faster. Prettier, yeah, but not any faster. That's why some devs thought that Mario 64 was poor - it had huge, empty areas, with minimal detail.

>>1856281
>pretty much only thing left intact was original ps1 cpu
Not true. The GS is itself backwards compatible with the Playstation GPU via shared instruction sets and registers.

So with the original Playstation CPU + GS backwards compatibility you've practically got the original hardware, no emulation required.

>advanced GS effects
Technically texture smoothing (aka filtering) IS an advanced GS effect, since the original Playstation was not capable of it

>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_games_incompatible_with_PlayStation_2
Actually a lot of those games DO work, they just have some glitches that don't appear on the actual PS1 console.

The reason for this is because the minor differences between the PS1 and the backwards compatible hardware in the PS2 essentially makes the PS2 like a clone system.

This is not a totally negative thing on part of the PS2. The Genesis 3 couldn't run every single Genesis game. Hell, even the SNES 1CHIP has some graphical glitches in Aladdin that it doesn't have in older versions - and externally it looks identical to older machines. byuu actually calls the SNES 1CHIP a clone system.

>>1856281
>bitch, please

So like, 7 games for the original model... out of a library of what, 6000 titles?

Yeah, what a horrible compatibility.

>>1856310
>Nintendo didn't allow devs to use any other microcode
This isn't actually true from what I've heard from N64 developers. The problem was that there was no middle way microcode between Fast3D (the high accuracy microcode) and Turbo3D (the low accuracy microcode). Nintendo didn't provide developers the means to edit the microcode themselves for the first couple of years so nobody could even make their own.

You essentially had a choice between special features / low performance, or Playstation-esque graphics / high performance. Developers actually preferred the former. Nobody at that time willingly thought that low accuracy 3D was good, more polygons or not - it was contrary to the realistic look that people wanted.

>in fact didn't even document that they exist
They did. A copy of the N64 SDK is available on the internet and I've read it. It's just that the choices were limited: see above.

>the N64 was not that much faster
If the Playstation tried doing in software what the Nintendo was doing in hardware, you'd get about 5 FPS on that console tops.

>That's why some devs thought that Mario 64 was poor - it had huge, empty areas, with minimal detail.
The Naughty Dog developers thought that - but they were being incredibly arrogant. Their method for high polygons (view-based occlusion) REQUIRES linear based level design to work properly. A lack of ambition worked in their favor.

>>1856306
>filling the gaps with imagination
>the detail is right there but can't be seen clearly

why don't you try to fill the gaps between jittering polygons with imagination too, kek

>>1856346
>If the Playstation tried doing in software what the Nintendo was doing in hardware, you'd get about 5 FPS on that console tops.

Oh, please. If the Playstation tried doing in software what the Saturn could do in hardware (with its backgrounds), it would get 5fps tops as well. Maybe less.

>>1856346
>Their method for high polygons (view-based occlusion) REQUIRES linear based level design to work properly. A lack of ambition worked in their favor.

They actually tried doing open-end in the start, and it just didn't work with the amount of detail they wanted. They would've had to remove all the detail that made the game look so good. So they went for high detail with heavy optimization instead.

It worked so well in the end that everyone who looked at the game thought that they were using some secret Sony development info because the game looked impossible to do. Sony themselves sent a guy over to them to check if the game was running on the real hardware after they got a video of it, because they couldn't believe their eyes (and they tried to make a copycat game but just couldn't get it done with so much detail). When they ran the game at E3, everyone thought it was running on SGI boxes behind the counter and not a Playstation.

>>1851321
There are also people who play 5th gen and earlier on HD TVs.

>>1856685
>Oh, please. If the Playstation tried doing in software what the Saturn could do in hardware (with its backgrounds), it would get 5fps tops as well. Maybe less.
This is bullshit quite frankly. The Playstation can push more sprites than the Saturn to make up for the lack of background processor: the real reason Playstation was worse at 2D was it had way less RAM than the Saturn.

The Nintendo 64 difference is much more serious because of the insane amount of processing the Playstation would need to do to correct its perspective problems, filter textures, stop polygon glitches in software.

> it just didn't work with the amount of detail they wanted. They would've had to remove all the detail that made the game look so good
So it basically was like Mario 64. I've never heard this story by the way. All I heard was they went straight into trying to recreate 2D platformers like DKC in 3D corridors.

If everybody took this approach for the sake of graphics, gaming wouldn't have evolved. In fact, why not just make endless fighting games? Because the view is so limited you can really max up the graphics! (like Tekken 3 or Virtua Fighter 2). Mario 64 needed to lower level of detail to do what it did.

For a more fair comparison, try Banjo-Kazooie and Spyro the Dragon. Spyro looks pretty good (for Playstation) thanks to an art-style specifically designed for its limitations but Banjo blows it out of the water.

>>1851321

M-MUH NOSTALGIA!!!!

I seriously hate people who don't use filters.

>>1857692
Banjo also worked its artstyle around technical limitations, really it just had really nice texturing.

>>1857745
>that
>nice textures

Nay, Banjo-Kazooie has visibly aged like dogshit in the sun.

>>1857719
I hate people who use filters on pre-PSX systems

>>1857797
Pretty sure he linked that as an example of an art-style. Banjo-Kazooie left all of its nice texturing for the environments.

There's one particular texture in Banjo-Kazooie which I think looks more detailed than found in any Playstation game.

>>1857828
Let me guess, the swamp ground texture? I really dislike the texture work in Banjo-Kazooie. Overall I think Banjo-Tooie looks much better.

>>1857804
You're fucking retarded if you don't use a CRT filter when playing 16 and 8 bit era games on a modern display.

>>1857843
Filters look like shit. If I want it to look authentic I'll play it on a fucking CRT.

>>1857839
>Let me guess, the swamp ground texture?
Nah, the blue sky wall painting in Gruntilda's Lair just outside the entry to Treasure Trove Cove. It's kinda hard to find, but it's there.

Tooie does look pretty damn good. Original textures in this image, just resolution upscaled.

>>1857882
Holy shit the wonders of playing with an emulator are once again made apparent to me. You'd never see this amount of detail playing on the N64. My opinions are thus reversed, thank you.

Why, and I mean WHY, do people like fucking scanlines? We're talking about the same shit in this pic right? What the fuck? Not even childhood nostalgia justifies playing this shit.

>>1857894
I still think it looks pretty nice on the real hardware when using a CRT connected via S-Video or RGB.

>>1857912
Maybe they had shitty TVs with shitty connectors. I never had scanlines on my tube TVs while playing news or snes

How does this make /vr/ feel? I like using filters on snes games.

>>1857912
Err, your CRTV didn't look like that. And the reason we like filters a lot of the time, not all the time, but to tweak and play with how things look, is: >>1857943 cos the image on the right looks fucking weird man. Would not play shit like that, but it's up to him.

>>1857943
Some people like rounded edges, others don't, who cares?

>>1857963
>who cares?

A lot of people on /vr/

>>1857943
I don't like using filters like that because the artists put a lot of work into making their pixel art look good. I get that the hill is made up of square bits, but they made it in a way which was supposed to be visually appealing.

Using filters like that just shits all over the pixel art.

>>1857961
>>1857963
>>1858334

>implying games were designed to be blocky and pixelated.

That's the hardware's limitations that caused that.

>>1858336
I'm not talking about blur or 3D games, Super Mario was literally DESIGNED to look like that. It's pixel art, it isn't 'blocky', it's literally 1x1 pixels arranged to look like things. The OP picture wasn't designed to be pixelated, it's the hardware limitation. Super Mario was designed to look that way, idiot.

>>1857692
>This is bullshit quite frankly. The Playstation can push more sprites than the Saturn to make up for the lack of background processor: the real reason Playstation was worse at 2D was it had way less RAM than the Saturn.

Saturn only has 512k more ram, but this is used by the background processor, which can do tiling, which saves you shit load of memory.

Playstation may be able to push enough sprites to create the backgrounds, but it doesn't have the muscle to apply the same amount of special effects to them. Linescroll, rowscroll, mosaic, crossfading, mirroring, double infinite playfields, etc.
Playstation could do some of them in software... but the Saturn does ALL of them at the same time, effortlessly, while crossfading them with the polygons to make 3d fog effects and the like.

Just try drawing a transparent, perspective correct, 4096x4096 ground on the Playstation, for one.

>The Nintendo 64 difference is much more serious because of the insane amount of processing the Playstation would need to do to correct its perspective problems, filter textures, stop polygon glitches in software.

The Playstation doesn't have the graphics hardware to draw perspective correct polygons or to filter textures; only way to do that would be to really process everything in software, and that would be impossibly slow on a 33mhz cpu that lacks an FPU. They did manage to do something like that on the Saturn with Burning Rangers, however (which just proves how much extra power it had lying around).

>If everybody took this approach for the sake of graphics, gaming wouldn't have evolved.

Writing an engine around the specific strengths/limitations of the hardware is actually how games evolved. If they haven't done that, all you'd ever get would be shitty multiplatform ports, which use the same engine on all hardware.
Some solutions just do not work on some hardware.

>>1857894
>Holy shit the wonders of playing with an emulator are once again made apparent to me. You'd never see this amount of detail playing on the N64. My opinions are thus reversed, thank you.

N64 has real 3d hardware so you actually CAN improve the resolution it without many problems... It's the Playstation where you get a wobbling mess if you increase the resolution.

>>1858686
>Saturn only has 512k more ram
Saturn games without the RAM pack only tend to be mildly improved over the Playstation versions - like Alpha 2.

The RAM pack is where the real Saturn advantage comes from, as there's no counterpart on the Playstation.

512KB doesn't sound like a lot, but that's literally 50% more VRAM than the Playstation.

>but it doesn't have the muscle to apply the same amount of special effects to them. Linescroll, rowscroll, mosaic, crossfading, mirroring, double infinite playfields, etc
I'm not so sure about that. You can achieve a lot with extra sprites and polygons.

>Just try drawing a transparent, perspective correct, 4096x4096 ground on the Playstation, for one.
Not a practical example, only a theoretical one.

>They did manage to do something like that on the Saturn with Burning Rangers
I'm not that familiar with Burning Rangers. I remember something about transparencies, but what else special did that game do?

>Writing an engine around the specific strengths/limitations of the hardware is actually how games evolved.
Well the Playstation wasn't really designed for open 3D games, so I think Crash was the right kind of software.

The thing is - the N64 was. The high accuracy microcode is practically tailor made for games like Mario 64 - because most of the 3D errors occur when doing long draw distance.

Something like Hyrule Field is impractical on the Playstation because of affine texture mapping - you'd need to keep subdiving polygons every couple of feet to prevent horrible texture glitches from occurring - which would result in an insane amount of polygons, far beyond the capabilities of any 5th generation console. The Nintendo 64 literally draw a series of massive hexagons to make up the field and because texture perspective is maintained there was no need for more polygons than that.

>>1858706
>I'm not so sure about that. You can achieve a lot with extra sprites and polygons.

Not the crazy type of effects the Saturn VDP2 can do in hardware though. Well, it can do some of them but you'd have to it in software, and it would be a pain, and you'd only do 1 or 2 effects while the Saturn can do all of them on 5 planes at the same time.

>Not a practical example, only a theoretical one.

It is a practical one. Specifically, the ground texture from Sonic Jam; but next to that 4096x4096 ground it also draws an 1024x1024 sky texture as well, at the same time. They are both perspective correct, can repeat endlessly, and have no draw distance limit.

Many other games use those types of ground to (nearly all fighting games, Sonic R, etc).
Thunder Force V also used that infinite plane trick on some backgrounds and it looks noticeably cruder on the Playstation as they had to change it to a short polygon wall.


>I'm not that familiar with Burning Rangers. I remember something about transparencies, but what else special did that game do?

It calculated and "drew" certain untextured polygons in software, in low resolution, and then uploaded them to VDP2 and rasterized them as a background. This allowed perspective correct 3d polygons which had no pixel overdraw issue while having up to 32 steps of additive transparency.

>>1858712
>It calculated and "drew" certain untextured polygons in software, in low resolution, and then uploaded them to VDP2 and rasterized them as a background. This allowed perspective correct 3d polygons which had no pixel overdraw issue while having up to 32 steps of additive transparency.
That's pretty neat, cause I know layered transparency was the real problem on Saturn. Same with the pixel overdraw. But still, Burning Rangers wasn't blowing Playstation software out of the water. I guess the lack of something like a powerful vector processor like the GTE was the culprit. VDP1 + VDP2 working in perfect tandem would make up for the fill rate problems though I imagine, cause VDP1 by itself is a poor as hell cousin compared to the PSX GPU.

>>1857912
>horribly bad intentional bullshot
your opinion is invalid

>>1857882
This? Looks heavily deposterized and compressed up close.

>>1857936
> I never had scanlines on my tube TVs while playing news or snes
Yes you did.
No one on the planet did not.

>>1858852
Doesn't look that bad on the real thing. That emulation shot is rife with errors, you can see texture seems on those edges there.

Check out this wiki
http://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Nintendo_64_emulators#Emulation_issues

>he N64 was the first console to feature texture filtering of any kind. However, unlike PC graphics hardware and every console after the N64, its implementation of bilinear texture filtering was unique in that in order to reduce strain on the system, it only used three samples as opposed to four, resulting in slightly jagged textures. Instead of faithfully applying this "imperfect" version of bilinear, HLE plugins instead apply conventional bilinear filtering, interpolating straight from the source texture up to the output resolution, much like on PC games. While technically this method of bilinear filtering is superior to the N64's, it can also result in textures that look even blurrier than on real hardware.

>>1856423
What? None of what you said made sense.

>>1857912
I don't know what the fuck is wrong with that filter. Probably intended for a different resolution or something.

All the "massive black lines" type scanline filters are dumb anyway. The good kind produces a subtler effect like in this picture which you may or may not like more than unfiltered.

>>1851321
In this particular example I like right better but often times high ressing PS1 games looks weird because the low poly count of models becomes more apparent and 3D models jump out very unnaturally from prerendered backgrounds in games that have those.

Basically if there's next to no 2D I usually use high res. With 2D or 3D with heavy 2D included I use native.

>>1858860
Some TVs do minimize scanlines, so I guess he had one that did. I have a shadow mask Toshiba set that barely shows them at all, while my Trini has sharp black lines through the image.

>>1858979
It's just dimmer. Why would you want it?

>>1859027
It's not just dimmer. It's slightly easier on the eyes and makes the lack of resolution seem less apparent.

If you don't look at it at full size it probably won't look right.

>>1859031
I don't think that making the picture less intelligible is a good solution to lack of resolution.

The only adequate way is to just play them as is. The inherently good-looking 2d games aren't that ugly even at four times the resolution.

>>1857943
only when done right

>>1858732
>I guess the lack of something like a powerful vector processor like the GTE was the culprit.

That could've been offset over time in software, since the machine had 2 cpus plus a vector DSP. The latter went relatively unused with the exception of a certain few games (Dead or Alive comes to mind). It still couldn't be as fast as the Playstation at sorting polygons (GTE capped at like 1 million triangles), but it probably could've handled as many as most Playstation games did.

The big problem was the VDP1 being way too slow compared to the playstation gpu. Hence all the tricks needed to get around it. Burning Rangers was the only game I recall that specifically went around VDP1 issues with clever use of other parts of the hardware.

It also did coloured lightning, which not many games did at the time, so it was a big thing.

>>1858706
>Well the Playstation wasn't really designed for open 3D games, so I think Crash was the right kind of software.

What your hardware is capable of can form the basis of your gameplay. Take something the hardware is very strong at doing so, and push the game around that. That's why best looking SNES games have mode 7 rotation up the wazoo, best looking MD games have tons of H interrupt scanline tricks and shadow/highlight effects, and so on.

>Saturn games without the RAM pack only tend to be mildly improved over the Playstation versions - like Alpha 2.

SF Alpha 2 barely used the VDP2 for anything other than scrolling backgrounds. I think it had linescroll on the ground. The VDP2 only helped by offloading some memory for sprites.

Darius Gaiden and Grandia are the only multiplatform games from the top of my head that lost some effects that relied specifically on the VDP2 stuff. And Thunderforce V too, but that was a good port, they approximated a lot of the effects very good, only the factory floor was butchered on the city level.

>>1857912
What that looks like is an old fucked up TV, and when I say old, I mean pretend it's 1987 and I'm telling you your TV looks old and fucked up.

Just weighing in that I prefer the left to the right in OP's example. I don't play retro games to be blown away by the outstanding graphics. I'd rather play something the way it looked when it came out than the cleaned up version. Just a personal preference with no judgment toward people that would rather have the reverse.

Sorry, but I want to play original versions not some stupid filters 'remakes'

>>1858852
Fuck I want to play banjo kazooie again now.

Where do I get these filter things

Especifically for the PS1/2 emulators, some games look ridiculous

>>1856240

>>1856325
now you're limiting yourself to original ps2 model to prove your point.

see how many more ps1 games slim is incompatible with. sony had time to get their shit together to fix it before releasing that model. all they fixed was the ps1drv exploit.

the list misses some games with custom anti modchip copy protection, (libcrypt) like FF8 which would lock up now and then or have issues with disc swap. not every region had that protection, so some versions would work fine.

some games with custom subchannel data would fail or behave erratically.

chrono cross is probably another one with that problem, and i believe there was some problem with mgs, but it might be minor and easy to get around.

note that in case of disc swap you could save before disc swap and boot console from second disc, but there were handful of games that did not do this.

>>1851659

>slightly worse res

Go play metroid on a 1080p flatscreen then on a trinitron. I dont care what kind of cords you are using, lower res is sharper and better for games.

>debatable

id take the deep rich colors of a tv over a gamma-fried flatscreen any day.

>only matters with extremely precise rhythm games

Jesus fucking christ anon are you kidding me...

>>1861357

Wake up grandpa, and take off those rose colored nostalgia goggles. crts are shit, and I'm glad we've upgraded our technology.

This is some serious hipsterism I swear...

>>1861235
It was only that one fucking slim model.

>>1861581
>Wake up grandpa, and take off those rose colored nostalgia goggles. crts are shit, and I'm glad we've upgraded our technology.

CRTs may be shit, but shitty old retro consoles were designed to work the best with them, exploiting tricks in them which are not possible to do with modern digital sets (such as 240p timing, or light guns).

Autist here.

Is there any way to play Project 64 games in 320x240 in fullscreen? The lowest it'll let you go is 640x480

>>1864981
Not possible because Windows itself doesn't support such low resolutions anymore.

>>1864984
Thanks.

That's a shame

>>1864984
>>1864981

Yes it does. You need to set a custom resolution in the gpu thing. However for 240p, you need to set the refresh rate to 120hz, which then causes issues.

You also need a CRT monitor.

A better way is to set it to 480p, and then use interlacing.cg which simulates 240p.

This can be done in RetroArch.

However, I believe the N64 core in RetroArch is currently broken.

>>1861598
it wasn't, there are plenty of slim models, and you are still ignoring the argument about games broken on all ps2 models.

>>1865921
>about games broken on all ps2 models.
There are only like 7 games "broken" on ALL PS2 models. And most of them do actually work aside from some glitches.