/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3653664
Now that the dust has settled, the right was is clearer but the left one clearly has less input lag.

>>3653664
the one without the watermark

>>3653664
Good question. The left was captured on composite, which the graphic designers took advantage of to create a transparency effect with the waterfall. The right was captured on RGB, which has sharper, better defined pixels, but also lacks the color bleed or blurring necessary for the waterfall transparency effect. Either way, the only real way to judge is to see the two in motion; still frames don't do justice for these sorts of things.

>>3653664
The RGB one. Always the RGB one.

>>3653789
jeez, this picture still gives me the creeps

>>3653715
There is absolutely nothing that could justify using Genesis composite. Even by composite standards it's absolute dogshit.

>>3653789
emulator should be added.

>>3653789
Since when does RGB or similar connection add sharpness aliasing and jpeg compression to an image?

Make another image and try harder next time.

>>3653869
>RGB on retro doesn't look like a pixelated mess
lmao kys lad

>>3653664
Left, obviously.

>>3653857
Except it's what the developers intended.

>>3654126
Except it's not.

>>3653913
It doesn't. You haven't seen good RGB on a Super Nintendo.

>>3654126
No it's fucking not. Genesis is the most clean, clear RGB picture out of any retro system.

>>3654126
It's what most people used back in the 90s, and it's what they designed for. They wouldn't have attempted the waterfall effect otherwise.

>>3654503
I'd rather have a sharp and clean image with a dithered waterfall instead of a blurry mess with a blended waterfall.

Composite video was a limitation at the time. Sure you can use it, but you're depriving yourself of objectively better quality.

>>3654515
That's just your opinion. I'm stating that the developers took advantage of a technical limitation, therefore it's how the game is meant to be displayed. Yes, the cleaner RGB image is nice, but it's not the intended experience.

>>3654503

It's especially true for the sega CD. The FMV needed the composite for the natural blur to make the visuals tolerable.

I can't even imagine how shit sewer shark or sherlock holmes would look on CRT on a good display.

In the early 90s most TVs did not have RGB input. people were not playing games on $20,000 broadcast monitors like they do now. Stores didn't sell any other cable accessory besides composite.

I don't even recall game magazines bringing this up in the 16-bit era. it was only the later console generations that EGM and gamepro started telling people to use component cables instead. Even in the late 90s maybe 20% of TVs had the input for it.

>>3654546
Sega CD does not look good when scaled up.

>>3654446
>>3654485
Sorry, it is. They developed games with RF/composite in mind, which is what the console shipped with. Try again.

ITT: gen Z fucker spent his whole salary on a PMV and realized developers didn't intend games for it

>>3654546
>Even in the late 90s maybe 20% of TVs had the input for it.
Maybe not as much for games, but certainly in the home theater segment, this was a big thing. Fancy 2 line, then 3 line, then motion adaptive comb filters to try to improve composite signal. Comb filters built into your laserdisc player with S-Video output. S-VHS with S-Video.

It doesn't matter, so long as you can play the game.

You'd think a board dedicated to retro video games would have a better understanding of composite artifact colors. This isn't exactly arcane knowledge.

>>3655078
They were developed on computers utilizing RGB colors. You try again.

>>3655130
Genesis games? Most studios ran custom development solutions. In most cases they would rig up their own in-house dev carts connected to their workstations via serial cable. These dev carts would be running on real hardware and consumer CRTs, unless the studio went all out and bought them PVMs just to debug on.

>>3655130

Not him, but that is totally irrelevant. You might as well say it wasn't designed for the Genesis at all at that point.

What a fucking stupid comment.

How is Sonic floating like that?

He's gotta be over an inch off the ground.

>>3655152
he is exactly 1 pixel off the ground.

>>3653913
t. Somebody who has never used RGB

That said, I think composite or even RF looks just fine on an old CRT, but RGB is the only way to go when I'm stuck with an LCD for whatever reason.

>>3654546
>people were not playing games on $20,000 broadcast monitors

Fucking americucks strike again. Just use a less shit TV. Most of ours support RGB. I have here a shitty "portable" CRT that I paid £5 for. It only has a single RF input and a single SCART input. Guess what? It supports RGB just fine.

>>3654485
No, saturn is. Genesis has some issues with jailbars on the blue channel.

>>3654126
Then why did my Mega Drive come packed with a SCART cable? How many layers of nostalgia are you on?

>>3655526

Equates to an inch, at least.

>>3656635
PAL is and always will be irellevant. We're talking about NTSC, which is where the games were made and intended for. Sorry 50Hz

>>3656645
>b-but it doesn't count
Yes, YOUR childhood experience is the epitome of retro gaming. Fuck off.

>>3656658
Go play Kingdom Hearts and DMC1's PAL versions after completing the NTSC versions.

I'll get some tissues.

>>3656658
It doesn't, PALfag. Neck yourself.

>>3656660
Oh shit I forgot I was posting on /v/.

>>3656661
>posted as I do my daily mental gymnastics to enjoy my RF output

>>3654446
Dithering.

>>3656639
hmm saying you have a 7 pixel long penis doesnt sound impressive tho.

>>3656668
Whatever, go 60Hz mod your console and connect it to your wife's LCD while she fucks a brown skinned middle eastern gentleman you dainty queer

Why does everyone on this site have to be so goddamned mean and hateful about literally everything? You can mention your disagreements without sounding like a 12 year old edgelord.

Do you guys really never tire of this form of discourse?

For a board that practically revolves around the phrase "gameplay before graphics" you guys sure enjoy being graphic whores. Just play the fucking game.

>>3657079
The thing about that is that for many of these games, such as sonic, we have played them. Many many hundreds of times. And now, when many of us are in the 30+ age range we've reached audiophile levels of autism about this shit.

>>3657086
hello fellow /vr/s, I see you are as bad as /v/irgins when it comes to discussing things.

Is there somewhere I can find information about this, I don't even know which cables are supposed to be RGB and when a CRT is able to display images lime the ones on OPs pic.

>>3657168
retrorgb.com

There's also CRT general here on /vr/.

>>3657181
thanks a lot anon, also, if I wanted make my own arcade would this be the right board or should I go to /diy/?

>>3657184
I wouldn't expect anyone here to be able to help you with that and honestly I doubt /diy/ would be much help either. Probably better forums elsewhere in that regard.

>>3657206
I see, thank a lot anon

>>3655142
They didn't design the game on a computer fed with composite signal.

>>3655130
>they were developed on keyboards using fingers
>developers intended consoles to be shipped with keyboards and fingers
Literally how retarded your argument is.

>>3653664
left with curved screen for nostalgia

>>3657282
No. That's just your argument, and it's retarded.

>>3657268
Gee that's a nice professional RGB monitor that the creator of Super Mario is using to demo his games on.

>>3657068
I dunno, I kinda enjoy it

>>3653664
The one with fewer scanlines is better. always.
that is why games weren't developed with scanlines. when you fucking program a video game, it's on a computer monitor.

>>3654126
Have you seen those supposed composite transparencies In motion? It's not to pretty.

>>3655128
Name 3 console games that utilize this.

>>3657579
Literally every console designed during CRTs, plus computers.

Any time you're emulating at 1080p on your LCD monitor and you see a bunch of weird vertical bars, guess what they were going for.

>>3657286
You must be Moses because you a baby in denial.

>>3656635
>Arguing about what video input the developers intended
>50Hz

>>3653664
Left, right ones grass and waterfall are fucked

>>3655128
This, almost all consoles took advantage of it, even CGA PC games.

>>3657353
PALfag annihilated

>>3656645
>>3656661
>>3657674

Except my PAL megadrive is switched and I can play games in 60 hz RGB glory ....

... just like devs intended

>>3660232
It's devs who made the PAL versions. If they run slower, they clearly didn't give a fuck enough to convert them at proper speed. In other words, they intended you to play it slower.
Do you realize now that "play like the devs intended" is complete bullshit ?

>>3660293
this is a genius level conclusion brought to you by the likes of pc gaming and critical theory

thanks anita

>>3653664
>>3653664
Are there honestly people who think either of those looks good at all?

>>3660361
Why are you here? Do you know this is /vr/ not /v/ right?

>>3660363
Given the quality of the thread i can't blame him for mixing up the two.

>>3660372
This entire board's quality has diminished greatly. It's become stagnant, and in doing so people have become lax on shitposting.

>>3660363
I know where I am. But I love old games. Not old display devices.

>>3660375
Do you think your pic looks good?

>>3655640
>I have here a shitty "portable" CRT that I paid £5 for

How does it work if you want to be a gamer in the UK but don't watch TV? Do you still have to bend the knee and pay your tax for your little gaming monitor?

Did you have to register with the government and let them know your home had a second telly? Or do you only have to do that for the first one?

>>3660378
Compared to either of OP's I think it looks magnitudes better.

>>3660405
>>3660375
Do you ever get bored of the same circular arguments?

>>3660375
that looks pretty bad man

>>3660407
Don't you? In almost every one of these I mention personal preference being the most important. OP is clearly implying one of those is the "correct" display, I am just adding my two cents. Also I find it funny that I genuinely don't know which one is supposed to look better in his example, they both look hideous to me.

Are you going to call me a millenial kid now so we can have the age argument too?

>>3660420
Remember that that's only about 10% of the screen and taken from a couple inches away. When you're actually playing all you see is nice clean edges.

>>3660424
I've never replied to you my dude. I just think it's kinda sad how often I see your setup. Did a CRT kill your mum or something?

>>3660429
the blacks are blue and it looks horrible

>>3660437
>I've never replied to you my dude.

I'm just replying to your replying. Anyways, I've just never liked the way CRTs look, and like the way the games I used to play look on modern screens a lot better.

>>3660439
To each their own.

>>3660383
You only have to have a TV license if you receive live television. I don't know anybody my age who pays for a TV license since those who do watch TV just stream with netflix or something.

>>3660375
>>3660429
>>3660450
This is fucking terrible. Please stop posting.

>>3660503
You realize I find pics of ugly ass CRT photos equally ugly to look at, but those get posted constantly as well. I'd prefer /vr/ was just for video game talk and people interested in displays talked about it on /g/, but that's not the case.

So yeah, you also get to hear about my preferences as well. Such is life.

>>3660293
PAL versions were generally optimized for PAL otherwise it wouldn't make much sense developing a PAL version in the first place, we are talking about world-wide compatible games originally developped for NTSC that run slower on PAL systems but please keep showing us how much brain limited you are, it's entertaining...

>>3660509
Well don't get all offended when people tell you your preferences are shit.

>>3660870
Likewise, friend. :) I'm not the one typing "This is fucking terrible. Please stop posting."

>>3660874
We're not friends faggot. Kill yourself.

>>3660923
>p-p-p-please kill yourself I can't take you talking to me anymore!

Weak.

>>3660383
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO PAY TV LICENSE UNLESS YOU'RE WATCHING TELEVISION BROADCASTED BY THE BBC.
IF YOU WANT TO USE BBC IPLAYER, YOU NEED TO THO.
DO NOT BELIEVE THE LIES.
YOU DO NOT NEED TO PAY TV LICENSE UNLESS YOU WATCH BBC SANCTIONED PROGRAMMING.

>>3663016
>paying the gov't for owning a TV

>>3663037
you don't pay the government to own a TV
you pay them for the "Free" programming of the BBC
You do not pay the government to own a TV
You just don't.
Only if you watch BBC.
As in. British Broadcasting Channel.
You don't pay the Government to OWN A TV.

>>3663071

How they know you don't watch BBC?
In Japan you have to pay if you have any TV, they just assume you are watching public channels with it.

>>3663016
This is false. You need to hold a television license to watch or record any live TV.

http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one

>>3663119
Any Live TV?
Fair Fair.
Still. You don't need one for the issue he started.

>>3663126
Yep, yep. Like I said in a previous post, most people my age don't have a TV license since they just watch Netflix mostly. I don't really watch TV in general.

It's kind of a shame because the BBC is a very good service but it can't last because nobody (myself included) is willing to pay the license.

>>3663158
Internet Killed TV.
Seems like a decent switch over.
TV is shit. And i can kind of control my ad intake on the pc..