/vr/ - Retro Games

I'm not against filters in principle, just the shitty smoothing ones for the most part, since they just smudge everything up. Only a few select games work well with it, like Earthbound and Yoshi's Island.

Shaders like this, though, are boss.

Because they make most games look crappy.
A vast majority of people, here and elsewhere, like these games because we're nostalgic towards them, and therefore love how they originally look.

This also explains our vehement love for old television sets and monitors.

Filters like that serve to pervert the original game, and generally just makes things look smudged.
There ARE a few exceptions, as >>464821 said.

>pixelated mess

How old are you, OP?

>>464851
Well, it is true on a TV, games didn't look THAT pixelated, since a regular TV softened up the image somewhat.

>>464863
Ugh... That's a bi-linear filtering, the worst kind of filter.

Most games look fine without filters, and the ones that don't look worse with a filter.

I find most filters to just make the game a blurry, or blobby, mess. At least the original graphics are nice and clean and crisp.

As >>464821 said, I'm not against filters by any principle, I've just yet to see one that looks good.

>>464989
Earthbound actually looks really great with a filter.

>>464873
That's not even close.
Bi-linear isn't even filtering, that's interpolation.
And CRTs at native resolution don't do filtering.
Learn what some of the terms your using mean.

>>465023
That's pretty good, but there are still some obvious mess ups.
The rabbit's (or whatever's) eyes, and things like L shapes made of like, three pixels tends to become kind of blob like too.

But definitely one of the better filters I've seen, probably because there's hard lines around everything.

>>464863
That was probably composite encoding, which did blend pixels together (for undithering purposes) and had a lot of analog compression artifacts which smoothed things out.

Some CRT sets like shadowmasks also helped with the aliasing though so I can see where you're coming from.

>>465023
It just makes it look a bit like a Flash game...I don't use filters at all in 2D games (though some filters are good on PS1, PS2, Saturn and N64 emulators for 3D games).

>>465042
That's a doge.

There's nothing wrong with unaltered retro system graphics, OP. Quit being a feeb.

That said, I love filters too. It's fun to mess around with them. I don't see why I should have to always choose one or the other.

>>464821
Is this an actual game in motion with shaders?

H...how?

>>465073
Fucking shader magic. It currently only works on Nvidia cards, though, because AMD has nodrivers. We're on the case, though, and by we, I mean one guy is editing random shit and we AMD plebs are being guinea pigs.

>>464821

I must have this shader. What is it?

If I'm playing Vs. Super Mario Bros on a RGB displau you bet your ass I'm going to use the Vs PPU filter.

>>465089
You mean the RGB palette? Man, but that shit is eye-searing.

>>465085
https://github.com/HarlequinVG/shaders/tree/master/gameboy_shader

Give it a try, but the grid effect won't work unless you're on Nvidia.

Because, in most cases, they make the game look like a wibbly-wobbly mess.

>>465097
>RetroArch
lol do your mom know ur a nerd rofl

>>465097
>cg
Disgusting. Fucking Nvidia pushing their inferior proprietary garbage.

Pretty much because pic related.

>>465107
Inferior to what exactly? Isn't it just an HLSL alternative that supports OpenGL along with/instead of Microsoft's proprietary garbage?

I sometimes just play around with them.

Nothing beats the classic look though.

>>465147
Not exactly.
It's a Nvidia-specific implementation of HLSL that was developed with the help of Microsoft. It's basically HLSL targeted toward OpenGL.
It was Nvidia's proposal for the official OpenGL shader language, but was refused in faver of ATI / 3DLabs' GLSL.
Nvidia never dropped it, and still keeps support in their drivers. It can transpile into GLSL, but it's shitty, optomized for Nvidia cards, and even still includes Nvidia-specific extensions.

As a language, it's fine, but it's a half-finished refused proposal that was competative, but is now vastly behind the curve compared to GLSL 4.0. There is literally no reason to use it unless you have no other choice.

It's all from personal experience. I just find emulating a CRT seems to look the best.
It's somewhat of an acquired taste, though. I've gone from using no filters, to trilinear, to scanlines, to CRT. I used to think scanlines were a bit much but after things are set in motion it starts to look a lot more presentable.

I think if anyone is 'against' filters, it's because they just find some filters to be so appalling that they don't hesitate to express that disgust.

For systems that were designed to run on TVs the NTSC filter/shader is a must. The graphics of the games were make with the TV's artifacts in mind; if you don't use the filter you just get a pixelated mess.

Filter a shit

>>465097
How good is RetroArch compared to the emulators I've been using for forever?

>>465181
RetroArch isn't an emulator in itself.

You can use bsnes's core with RA if you want.

>>465173
>trilinear
You mean bilinear. Trilinear implies 3 dimensions, and only works for 3D interpolation and mipmaps.

>>465187
Bilinear, yeah; sorry.

>>465181
'Retroarch' is a gui skin that lets you use 'multiple' emulators from the same program.
You still need the other emulators, this just lets you hit one button. If you already use the other emulators, it's a convenience shortcut. It adds nothing on its own.

It's not that I like the pixelated look (although it looks fine on my computer as my monitors are CRTs) it's that I feel that the filters produce a substantially more ugly product.

>>465197
>'Retroarch' is a gui skin that lets you use 'multiple' emulators from the same program.

I never used it, but I was under the impression (from EVERYONE that talked about it) that RetroArch was an emulator of its own and it had better "accuracy" than other emulators (namely PS1, SNES). I was thinking how could this be, since BSNES was the highest you could get, now it all makes sense since it's always BSNES. Fuck those faggots and their stupid wording/ignorance.

>>465197
That's not quite accurate. RetroArch is basically an emulator that doesn't actually have its own emulation core. Rather, it loads the cores of other emulators and makes them its own. However, the cores have to be ported into the libretro API, which is what RetroArch uses. So only emulators that get ported into this API are able to be used.

>>465213
Then you misunderstood, quite simply. What people probably meant is that RetroArch can be the most accurate SNES emulator BECAUSE it can use the bsnes core.

>>465213
they were macfags

showing myself out
>>>/g/

>>465197

Nope, it's not just a GUI, the GUI is just a launcher. RetroArch itself is command line only. The emulators it uses are only the cores modified to use the "libretro" API, and since RetroArch is being ported to many plaforms, it allows easy porting of an emulator (e.g. Nestopia on the Wii). RetroArch also has some things most standalone emualtors don't have, such as perfect audio/video synchronization using dynamic rate control, or advanced multipass pixel shader support.

>>465213
RetroArch has the bSNES core as an option, as well as some accurate emulators for other systems like Nestopia and Gambatte.

i love use filters on NEC PC ENGINGE, looks very awsome

>>465178

cute **

I'm against emulators in general. Filters either try to emulate further what it's like to play games on a TV (but end up looking like a JPEG of a TV as opposed to a real TV) or just look like complete shit, even to go as far as to alter the art in some way.

>>465023
That's terrible.

I prefer the ntsc filter, because it hides the excessive amount of dithering most games used.

HQ4X, Kreed, etc. they all just make it look worse.

This pic is not the actual ntsc filter, but you get the idea.

It'd be like digitally re-coloring every movie you watch to suit your tastes because you like it that way. It's not how the artist envisioned it, so why do it?

I mean, to each their own. If you like filters, use them. But don't ever try to explain how they're somehow better than playing the game the way it was made to be, because it's an inherently flawed argument.

>>465331
What game is that? Looks like a sega game.

>>465345
Streets of Rage 2 or 3 I believe

>>465176
DOS games were designed with line doubling in mind (sharp pixels, no scanlines), and yet they use the exact same pixel art techniques as console games. It's not a "pixelated mess", you just like filters because that's what you're used to.

>>464821
Is that... emulating the ghosting problem of early handheld console's screens?

...For what purpose?

Why would anyone intentionally add that flaw?

>>465425
>yet they use the exact same pixel art techniques as console games
[citation needed]

>>465425
Uh, depends on the DOS game, chief. Super old pre-VGA games were most certainly not designed to run at 640x480, as the monitors they ran under were 15KHz. You can make a case for games made in the late 80's to early 90's, but you can't tell me Alley Cat, King's Quest, or Ultima were meant to be line-doubled.

>>465438
Personal preference. And it can be turned off.

I actually really enjoy pixel art.

>>465452
Mode 13h, the most iconic of all "DOS game" graphics modes, was always line doubled.

>>465438

Accuracy to the original game is often a goal of these sorts of things. So if the original game on the original console had ghosting, then ghosting is a part of the original gameplay experience.

Of course at some point accuracy becomes kind of silly, but it seems pretty understandable why people would want that.

>>464795
>So, why are you all so against filters
Because all "high resolution" filters look like ass. All they do is smudge the picture or distort edges to make it look smoother.

Pixels I have no problem with, as long as that's how it is originally.

>>465451
A lot of EGA games did it, knowing some people still used composite monitors, but a lot of the "pixel art" tecniques you see on further games are because deluxe paint (one of the most used tools) did gradients that way by default.

>>465474
>You can make a case for games made in the late 80's to early 90's

As it happens, this is the time period when 13h was most used. I acknowledged that. But that doesn't cover pre-VGA DOS games.

>>465181
It's actually very handy. It has good cores for PC-Engine and PSX, which there are pretty much no good standalone emulators for that are free. It also has unified input settings and video settings, so you hardly need to configure anything for the individual cores.

>>465213
>RetroArch was an emulator of its own
It uses ports of cores from other existing emulators. For some consoles, such as NES, there are several options. bsnes is one of them. It's actually better to use bsnes via RetroArch, as you don't have to go through Higan/bsnes's annoying import conversion system.

>>465475
It's somewhat more accurate to the way the games were displayed, but not to the way the developers wanted their games to be.
No game used the shitty blurry ghosty thing as a "visual effect" or whatever, and developers intentionally had slower movement and scrolling in their games so that it was possible to follow the action.
Concessions were made so that you, the player, could see what was going on. And then you go and make things blurry on purpose, in direct opposition to every early handheld developer's goals, because "THAT'S WHAT THE SHIT QUALITY SCREENS OF THE TIME LOOKED LIKE BACK THEN".

What I'm saying is, that's really dumb.

> Is it just because of nostalgia sake, or do you really prefer the pixelated mess?

It's better than the gooey mess.

>>465509
Well, if people feel nostalgia for the shitty ghosting, let them. I don't see the issue. No need to swing the autism to the other end.

>>465438
Some games were developed with the ghosting in mind, like ZAS.
All the dithered effects and parallax scrolling looks like shit on emulators due to not having ghosting.

>>465482
I call bullshit on this. Often, unfiltered graphics are unrecognizable compared to filtered graphics or graphics displayed on a TV. For example, take the text on the signs of FF III/VI or other SNES game of the era. Unfiltered, the text is nearly unreadable, when you apply the filter you can easily read what the sign says. If the developers had intended those signs to be a pixelated mess they would have made them such that you can read them unfiltered.

>>465540
I've played through all the SNES FF games. Most of them several times. I never used any filters, and I never had any trouble reading the text.

Maybe you need to get your eyes checked.

>>465539
No they don't. Game looks just fine unfiltered.

>>465540
Well, that's a whole lot of subjectiveness there. I don't want to search for the inn signs and whatnot, could you provide it? I was mainly talking about dithering patterns, since I don't see how could you manage a small macropixel/tile space more effectively other than using common sense.

>>465023
Look at the dog on the left. That's the reason fitlers are bad.

What's the point anyway? Games with good graphics still look great. Yes, stuff like DKC looks horrible, but properly 2D games that used real pixel-painted graphics look good without any filters.

>>465573
DKC is a game that I think absolutely necessitates either playing it on a CRT, or with a CRT shader. The CG graphics do not scale well otherwise. They are fairly detailed, but nearest-neighbor pixelates the fuck out of those details, and smoothing filters absolutely murders them.

>>465543
>>465559
This is unfiltered, look at the inn sign: it is unreadable.

>>465331
2XSal actually looks mildly okay on Streets Of Rage

HQ4X makes me want to vomit though

>>465598
No, I can read it fine. Also, that's just a background object, not actual game text. It's not that unusual for objects to have near-unreadable text on them in the background. I can't imagine it would be much more readable on an old TV screen.

>>465598
>>465559
>>465543
Now you can read the sign and the whole image looks much better.

>>465598
>>465608
Is this some kind of ruse? It's very easy to read in both images.

>>465608
The sign's readability is pretty much exactly the same in both pictures. The second one is just more smudged.

>>465608
This is a perfect example of how fucking stupid emulatorfags are.

>>465608
>>465598
>FFIII
Please rename your files.

>>465620
It's FF III.
Deal with it.

>>465624
>typical filterfag can't into accuracy

>>465598
Of course you can't read it, the image is streched as fuck and not an integer scale from the original resolution. Bilinear filtering applies to that issue, which wouldn't exist if you kept the aspect ratio/integer scale.

>>465624
>It's FF III

But it's not you fucking idiot.

>>465607
>>465615
>>465617
>>465618
In the unfiltered image you can't discern the letters or anything with small detail. It's just a pixelated mess. Also look at the tiles and the roofs: I doubt the artist intended such harsh contrast. The filter (and a real TV) lowers the contrast and makes a more pleasant picture.

>>465628
It is three times as large as the original resolution.

>>465630
>In the unfiltered image you can't discern the letters
_I_ can discern them perfectly fine in either of the images. If anything, the unfiltered image looks sharper and easier to read.
Maybe you need to get your vision checked.

>>465638
I can read it too, but maybe that's just because I see like a hawk. There is some difference in clarity, but it's small.

>>465630
>In the unfiltered image you can't discern the letters or anything with small detail. It's just a pixelated mess.
But that's wrong you fucking retard. 4 people replied to you and said they saw no meaningful difference.

>Also look at the tiles and the roofs: I doubt the artist intended such harsh contrast. The filter (and a real TV) lowers the contrast and makes a more pleasant picture.
You don't need to make everything blurry to change the contrast.

>>465629
>>465627
>>465620
>filename

>>465650
>You don't need to make everything blurry
A real TV makes it blurry, just like the artist intended.

>>465654
Sure at the time of release in NA it was accurate. But now that the previous three have been released it makes sense to call it by it's correct franchise number to avoid confusion. You still get retards uploading roms of VI under both III and VI.

>>465658
They didn't intend for you to emulate their games on a computer.

>>465647
>>465651
>>465656
>>465660
>shitty uneven grey bars
>non-integer scaling
>curvature

Come on son.

>>465634
No, because it follows a 3/2 pixel width pattern, meaning it's not an integer scale. Try again.

>>465650
>4 people replied to you and said they saw no meaningful difference.
I think they mean the text in the narration. The text in the inn sign is unreadable in the unfiltered version.

>>465658
Sure, if you use RF/composite.

>>465675
Well one of those 4 people was me, and I meant the INN sign.

>>465675
No we/they didn't, it fucking isn't. Jesus christ man.

>>465674
> because it follows a 3/2 pixel width pattern
You mean it uses the correct SNES aspect ratio? Yes it does, the SNES didn't use square pixels.

>>465678
>Sure, if you use RF/composite.
Like 99% of all the TV in use in 1993.

>>465658
That's just a hardware flaw. It's not like they had a choice in the matter. It was not within the artist's control. I'm sure whoever made the pixel art didn't do so on a smudgy old TV connected by composite. If anything, the game probably looks more like what the artists originally created than what you'd get on an old TV.

>>465685
It didn't?

>>465689
Maybe you shoud check your fucking privilege.

>>465685
>SNES didn't use square pixels
Hahaha

>>465693
>If anything, the game probably looks more like what the artists originally created than what you'd get on an old TV
Not always.
Lots of Genesis games for instance counted on the horizontal blurriness of old CRTs for some pseudo transparency effects.

>>465693
The artist wasn't a retard. Sure he worked on a PC or mac or whatever but he for sure checked the final result in a variety of TVs. Even web monkeys check their sites in several browers.

>>465675
No, I meant the INN sign. I can read it perfectly fine in either of the pictures. The second picture looks smudged, which makes it overall look worse, but as far as readability goes - both for the INN sign and the narration text - it makes absolutely no difference. If you seriously can't read it in the first picture, you might want to get that checked out.

>>465685

>>SNES didn't use square pixels

>>465703
>Hahaha
Your board is that way >>>/v/, you obviously only have played snes games in emulators.

Anyone who is against CRT shaders obviously has never played the game on a real CRT TV.

The image is incomparable to anything we have emulated on an LCD yet.

>>465708
THE GENESIS COMPOSITE ENCODER DID THE BLURRING BY SHIFTING PIXELS. I'M SHOUTING THIS SO I MAKE IT LOOK LIKE IT'S BIG DEAL, SO THAT PEOPLE STOP SAYING IT WAS A CRT ARTIFACT.

>>465719
See >>465728

>>465730
Whatever nerd.
Point is pixels were blended horizontally.

>>465731
This guys knows his stuff.

>>465736
Knows what? How to state opinions?

>>465664
Does it bother you? Are your jimmies not rustled?

>>465728
Not him, but I had a SNES when I was a kid, and I never noticed the pixels being non-square. If they actually were, then it certainly wasn't enough to be very noticeable.

>>465745
You just learned something today.

>>465740
Why Nintendo went ahead shifting pixel diagonally instead of taking the horizontal way like Sega did is beyond me. The effect is pretty neato, though.

>>465731
>obviously has never played the game on a real CRT TV
I have, and good riddance to that old crap.

My original SNES broke in 1998, and I discovered emulators in 1999. I never really noticed the difference, or at least my mind never really registered it. I see no point in trying to emulate bad picture quality.

>>465753
I actually never even knew about pixels until I booted up roms in emulators.

Probably because my TV wasn't crap.

>>465740
>yfw this is an SNES mini on an LCD TV

>>465757
I knew about pixels long before that, but I never noticed any use of non-square pixels anywhere except in Sierra's old AGI titles. The pixels in most PC games and all console games always looked square to me.

>>465728
>>465748
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_aspect_ratio

A pixel is always square you moron, the monitor stretching them doesn't have anything to do with how the actual machine renders things. And no monitor ever changed the width of stuff. Please go away.

>>465731
>god tier
using an actual CRT

>pretty good tier
NTSC filter

>meh tier
unfiltered

>stupid tier
sad attempts to make something that isn't a CRT look like a CRT

>shit tier
2xSAI, HQ3x, Super Eagle, etc.

>>465734

>>465769
From your link:
> However, some imaging systems,
>especially those that must be compatible
>with standard-definition television motion
>pictures, display an image as a grid of
>rectangular pixels, in which the pixel width
>and height are different. Pixel Aspect Ratio
>describes this difference.

>rectangular pixels
>the pixel width and height are different

I can't make this shit up.

>>465771
>using an actual CRT
Why? Do you enjoy shitty image quality and your eyes burning after a few hours of playing?

>NTSC filter
Well, they're better than the "shit tier" ones, but I really don't see the point.

>2xSAI, HQ3x, Super Eagle, etc.
Agreed, those look like complete garbage.
It baffles me how anyone can stand playing anything using those.

>>465776
>putting a / before the 6

th-that will s-show him

So how about filters on PSX games? Any tips?

>>465753
The idea of CRTs does not ensure bad picture quality, bad picture quality comes from individual implementations of the underlying technology.
But I agree with you about using one type of display and then emulating another type of display is dumb.

>>465786
Same as other consoles. Don't use any.
If you absolutely need it to be smudged, use bilinear filtering. Personally, I don't like it. I prefer a nice crisp detailed picture without artificial smudging.

>>465785

oooh I drew a one that looks like a slash, I guess I don't play snes games after all :(

>>465789
>bad picture quality comes from individual implementations of the underlying technology
Of course, there existed CRT PC monitors that had much better screens and supported much higher resolutions than TVs, but I think pretty much no matter what you do, you will never be able to get the same clear crisp image on a CRT - or even on an LCD using VGA (which all CRT PC monitors used) - as you will on a decent quality LCD or LED monitor/TV using a modern display cable such as DVI or HDMI.

>>465776
Your picture doesn't change the fact that the pixels are not square.

>>465781
>display an image as a grid of rectangular pixels
>display

I can be blamed because the page I chose wasn't the best for proving my point. But anybody can tell you the console renders square pixels and then the TV does the stretching. The width may change especially when taking 60hz and 50hz in account, but it's always analog stretching. The emulator does precisely what the real console digitally does things.

>>465791
I'm not talking about bilinear smudging or any of that crap. I just prefer the way scanlines look on 2D games.

>>465807
Why? It just makes the image look very dark and full of black lines. Even on a CRT TV it doesn't look like that.

>>465807
>I just prefer the way scanlines look
They look hideous. Scanlines are even worse than the intense filters.

>>465807
Well you better need bilinear because that's not an integer scaling. I don't know why this many people play the games and don't even notice.

I see you're also using ePSXe, you'd want to change that.

>>465786
>>465807
>using ePSXe

>>465807
>>465786
Your scanlines suck.

>>465807
>>465810
>>465812
I'm not taking sides in this, but I think maybe these people who use these excessive scanlines have only really seen CRTs in photographs, or at least it's been so long that it's their prevaling mental image of them.

>>465805
That's irrelevant.
I don't want square pixels because they are not meant to be displayed as squares.
Again, the artists are not retards and made the graphics taking that into account.

>>465807
>>465810
>>465812
I'm not taking sides in this, but I think maybe these people who use these excessive scanlines have only really seen CRTs in photographs, or at least it's been so long since they used them regularly that it's their prevaling mental image of them.

>>465823
Could be. I don't know. Whatever floats their boat.

>>465826
whoops, double post.
and damn sql error wont let me delete

>>465829
>moot in charge of not breaking 4chan

>>465824
But those are not any derivative of square pixels, they're just wrong pixels. The artists made sure to fill the 256x224 screen, not to take in account how the TVs stretched the image. You get a whole different feel on a 320x224 game, which does actually display square pixels because there's less to stretch, but it's not like the artist gave a damn, the artists gave a damn about making 8x8 tiles that fit in the VRAM. You're just grasping at straws here.

>>465821
>>465818
>>465816
>>465812
>>465810
Well I know it looks like shit. I literally just opened up the settings and turned on default scanlines. That's why I'm asking for advice.

Oh, and what PSX emulator should I be using instead?

>>465829
>thought his post failed but slightly modified it on the repost anyway

i thought i was the only one who did this

>>465836
For 2D games, definitely RetroArch. For 3D games, if you want hi-res graphics, PCSX-R.

>>465838
I do too, but not in this case. Now that I re-read them, I did add another bit at the last minute. But it's funny, I definitely remember only clicking submit once.

>>465834
Do you really think the artists are retards that wouldn't check how their work would look in the device it was intended to be displayed?
If they didn't circles would look as ellipses and squares would look rectangular, etc.
The artist filled the screen but you can bet he took into account how it would be displayed in a real TV because otherwise his art would be shit.
Likewise, you can bet graphic design people care about how they work looks when printed, even if they just fill a 50 Megapixel image in their computer.

>>465836
>Well I know it looks like shit. I literally just opened up the settings and turned on default scanlines. That's why I'm asking for advice.
If you want to make scanlines look good, I can't really help with that. Sorry. Maybe there are other scanline-users who can help with that.

>Oh, and what PSX emulator should I be using instead?
The only decent one that is still being developed that I know of is RetroArch with the mednafen PSX core. I only recently discovered it myself, so I haven't used it all that much yet, but it runs Castlevania: Symphony of the Night perfectly and didn't suffer from the jerkiness and out-of-place 3D graphics that ePSXe does.

Last time I played any PSX games before that, I used pSX-Emulator, but that one has sadly been dead for years now, and the latest version has an issue in SOTN that causes it to sometimes crash when leaving the loading screens. (it is still completable though, you just need to make safety savestates every time passing through a loading screen and reload and retry if it crashes)

>>465850
Looks like a circle to me, and it's 1:1

Now you'll start to talk about second rate artists.

>>465785

are you literally retarded
inb4 TWAS BUT AN ACT

>>465861
Yeah, that looks fine to me.

>>465826
>>465823
Welp, >>465807 here. Looks like I've been called out, because I never played many 2D games as a child and it really has been forever since I used a CRT and I have no idea what I'm talking about when it comes to filters.

>>465856
>>465845
Thanks! I'll give RetroArch and PCSX-R a go.
Can I ask why ePSXe is frowned upon? I generally haven't had any problems with it (aside from some audio syncing issues which I blamed on my PC being shit).

>>465861

Too lazy to get a screenshot, but go watch the Chrono Trigger intro until the moon above the castle for a counterexample.

>>465905
Or even the clock at the beginning.

>>465880
>Can I ask why ePSXe is frowned upon
I don't know if it's "frowned upon" exactly, but I can tell you why I don't like using it.
I tried it out a while ago when I wanted to play SOTN again, because at the time I didn't know of, and couldn't find any others that were not long dead. Initially, the plugin-system was a bit of a pain in the ass, and makes the whole thing seem a bit disjointed and messy. I eventually got it up and running, but it just felt like something was off. It was like the game was subtly "jerky" without me being able to quite put my finger on what was wrong. It just didn't feel smooth. I tried a few different graphics plugins using different methods (OpenGL, DirectX) and tried tweaking various settings, but the "offness" remained. This was in windowed mode, however. When I tried running it in fullscreen, it just plain slowed down and wouldn't even run at full speed anymore. Also, it renders 3D graphics at a different resolution than the low-res 2D environments, making all 3D objects look out of place. This would be a common problem, since mixing 2D pre-rendered backgrounds with 3D objects was very common practice in that era. After trying a bit, I just dropped the whole thing and assumed that there just didn't exist any good PSX emulators at the moment, so it was better to just leave it until one showed up. Then a few months later, I heard of RetroArch here and tried it, and found that it actually works very good and doesn't suffer from any of the issues I had with ePSXe.

>>465912
There ARE software plugins for ePSXe and PCSX-R that run 3D at native PS1 resolution, but then, why bother? Just use RetroArch's Mednafen core, which is on the whole much more accurate.

The plugin emulators are still good if you like hi-res 3D graphics on fully 3D games like Spyro.

>>465905
Cool, still doesn't change the fact the width stays like it is, which makes your screen look ugly, because it's full of stretched into oblivion pixels with no control whatsoever. Enjoy your garbage.

>>465917
>There ARE software plugins for ePSXe and PCSX-R that run 3D at native PS1 resolution
Even if there are, would that fix the subtle jerkiness and inability to run at full speed in fullscreen?

>why bother?
Why indeed. ePSXe is closed-source as well, so there is really no reason to be using it when there is a far superior open-source emulator available. Closed-source, outdated and broken - both by design and implementation.

>Just use RetroArch's Mednafen core, which is on the whole much more accurate.
I am, and will continue to do so unless and until I find something better. Haven't had any issues with it so far.

>>465919
Using a CRT monitor, you can make the monitor stretch the image into the proper 4:3 without distortion.

These games were just not meant for LCDs.

Here we go.
1/5

>>465928
Using PCSX-R is sure to fix the jerkiness. It did for me, and I was using ePSXe 1.6.0 as the main emulator since then. I can't think that after getting onto 1.8.0 they still didn't fix the stuttering and timing.

>>465928
My rule of thumb for PS1 games: 2D goes on RetroArch, 3D goes on PCSX-R (I don't mind the polygon jitter). Some games mix both, but generally if it's 2D sprites over 3D backgrounds, they go on RetroArch, but if it's 3D characters over 2D backgrounds, I prefer PCSX-R. It just depend on what I feel looks better depending on the game.

>>465917
>The plugin emulators are still good if you like hi-res 3D graphics on fully 3D games like Spyro.
Yeah, I can imagine it being useful on pure 3D games. It's just that every game I've played on PSX so far has used a mixture of prerendered backgrounds and 3D objects. I guess I should try Spyro at some point.

2/5

>>465905
>>465908
>>465919
But this proves that the artists did care about making art that looks good on TVs.

3/5

4/5

>>465940
1.8.0 was less about fixing bugs and increasing compatibility (even though to be fair there was some of that), and more about advertising their Android port, which is payware. Notice how the Android version gets occasional updates, but nothing for PC.

5/5

>>465956
So they're not only closed-source, outdated and broken, but also sellouts...

/vr/ - Emulators, CRT TVs, Filters & Autism

Depends on the emulator and the game. I use filters on all the old stuff like NES/Genesis etc. because I upscale the image to my native resolution. More recent systems I keep unfiltered like PS1.. still looks very nice even with no filters applied.

Also I think NTSC scanline fitlers are the dumbest shit ever, especially considering I'm yuro fag and we use PAL.

>>465968
Yep. The sooner people stop using that shit and use better alternatives, the sooner emulation improves, although it's pretty damn good already.

Wish the same could be said about N64 emulation. It is 2013, and only NOW is Rogue Squadron beginning to finally become playable.

>>465929
Yes, but you go tell me CRT (TV, since VGA have their own menus for stretching) monitors output this >>465598 and I'll laugh you off.

>>465608 doesn't count since he's technically cheating, using bilinear to overcome non-integer scaling. Do you know what integer scaling is? It means that a number is an integer multiple of another, and is depicted accurately. I can even forgive horizontal stretching the way Snes9x does, but that pic is just a mess of pixels of all sizes. And he was complaining like it was bewildering to try and read the damn sign without filters.

>>465978
You forgot "Discussion".

Yeah guys what's wrong with filters?

>>465987
Masterpiece.

>>465981
>Wish the same could be said about N64 emulation
Yeah, it's rather strange how there doesn't seem to be any actively developed and decent N64 emulators around. A few years ago when I was playing Zelda 64 OOT and MM, I was looking at various emulators. Around that time, a project called mupen64plus was started, which looked promising but unfortunately didn't have any releases at the time. I wonder what the state of things are now.

>>465982
Not to be rude, but I don't quite understand your post. Could you rephrase it?

>>465987
Looks like one of those windows games where you get shit like this if you force it to run in 256 colors

>>465987
My eyes! It burns!

>not using old ass monitor

>>466002
Mupen64plus is still being actively developed. You can get recent builds from EmuCR, but it's command line, which can be a pain.

Also, Project 64 just came out with version 2.0 and went open source, and it's beginning to see some new development itself. Using a new RSP plugin, it is now possible to play some games like Rogue Squadron, although glitches persist.

And to top it off, there is a new cycle-accurate (think bsnes) N64 emulation in the works called Cen64. It's still not ready, but it is extremely promising, and will actually emulate the N64 in its entirety.

N64 emulation is going through something of a revival after years of stagnation. About fucking time.

>>465912
>>465917
>>465917
>>465928
Thanks for all the advice. I now feel better about my emulators.

>>465987
Is that a real Van Gough?

>>466003
>>465598 has 2x3 and 3x3 pixels, which doesn't make sense, if not for him. His argument was that CRT monitors helped you read small signs, which is bull. Then we went on and argued some more while we were both changing flag-posts because the argument is stupid to begin with.

>>466020
Stop being butthurt and accept that the graphics were designed for CRT TV and filters are an improvement over unfiltered pixelated mess.

>>465987
Filters tend to work better with cartoon/anime style games. They have the hard edges, limited detail, and high contrast that works well with a good filter. Games with high detail don't work as well because of the smudging.

Screenshots really don't do correctly-done filters justice.

Compare.

>>466013
>Mupen64plus is still being actively developed
I know, I just haven't tried it recently, so I don't know what state it is in at the moment. Is it able to emulate games like the Zelda 64s and Conker's Bad Fur Day perfectly?
The previous emulator I used had issues with certain things using the default graphics plugin. Most notably the transformation sequences in Majora's Mask and some stuff in BFD.

>Also, Project 64 just came out with version 2.0 and went open source
Neat. That might at least make it an option.

>there is a new cycle-accurate (think bsnes) N64 emulation in the works called Cen64
Sounds like things are looking up. Let's hope they get it into a usable state soon.

>About fucking time.
Indeed.

>>466030
Opinion. I'm not trying to deny you from having one. But there's no actual improvement in filtering stuff. The stretching you did was wrong, >>466025 did it right. CRT didn't magically make text readable. The end.

>>465675
If you are honestly unable to read the unfiltered version, you desperately need to see an optometrist.

If you're just wildly exaggerating in order to make a (stupid) point that no-one agrees with, please kill yourself now.

>>466035
>>466038
That's not a filter.

>>466049
>The stretching you did was wrong
The stretching is to correct for my LCD's square pixels. It is not wrong, it is displayed as the artist intended, just like the moon in CT is intended to be a circle instead of a ellipse.

Sometimes I like to see how horrible I can make a game look with shaders or filters.

>>466061
You made me mess with tools I didn't even want to mess.

GUESS THE RIGHT METHOD OF HORIZONTALLY STRETCHING AN IMAGE BETWEEN PIC 2 AND 3.

I'M PLATINUM MAD.

>>466097
Is that the '90s industrial rock music video filter?

>>466104
Not him, but the moon looks the most circular in the middle one.

>>466104
Why are you mad?

>>466124
Yeah I goofed up but my point was that the vertical resolution should stay as a multiple of 224, which is not in that infamous inn image the guy posted. NTSC TVs had an actual display view of 224 vertical pixels, so you can't argue that. That screen with the inn sign he posted fucks up both the horizontal and vertical resolution so he HAS to resort to filtering to make it look good, exploiting this occurance to make it look like filtering is factually the better option, which is arguable.

>>465107
>>465147
>>465171

Does RetroArch work with GLSL shaders?

It might be easiest to port the CG shaders to GLSL, then.

>>466210
It supports both XML GLSL and Cg HLSL.

>>466154
This is another way of scaling.
The sign is still pretty much unreadable.

>>466154
>>466226
With the filter we get a nice sign and an overall better image.

>>466226
>unreadable
Yeah, if you're a moron

>>466226
About fucking time. But no, I can still read it, I imagine it's those two little pixels on the upper right side of the N bothering you into thinking it's not an N. But I can process the shading just fine. It may look more obvious with the bilinear filtering, but that has nothing to do with how CRT displayed it at the time. And it's only an improvement if you're seeing-impaired.

>>466219

Hmm.. There's practically no documentation on writing xml/GLSL shaders for retroarch.

>>466315
There's this:

http://gitorious.org/bsnes/pages/XmlShaderFormat

However, they've since added a bunch more shit to the spec. Check around the RetroArch forums.

>>465783

I find the NTSC filter to be superior to unfiltered in 100% of SNES games I tested. Color bleeding from the analog signal was something that was really taken in consideration by the artists of the time.

>>465178
How do I use this on RetroArch?
I need this
I just started playing. On dungeon 4.
PLEASE RESPOND

>>464795

What's the point of pixel art if you can't see the pixels?

>>466406
There's shaders here:

https://gitorious.org/bsnes/xml-shaders/trees/master/shaders/OpenGL

And here:

https://github.com/libretro/common-shaders

https://github.com/Themaister/Emulator-Shader-Pack/tree/master/Cg

Try out one of the xBR shaders, or possibly SABR. They look close to that.

>>466231
The blur actually makes it painful to look at. My eyes don't have to adjust without it and I could read the word INN without any trouble.

>>466231
Better image? Open two tabs one with the unfiltered and one with the filtered, the unfiltered has a way clearer image, doesn't look like a blurry mess.

>>466410
>Implying you could see sprites in high definition on original hardware.

You do realise that devs designed artwork around the technology available at the time, so all that lovely pixel art would look best at native res on a CRT. If anything, using filters will get you closer to an original experience, way more so than upscaling on modern hardware, as the lack of visible pixels ruins the aesthetic of a lot of older games.

Do any of you autists realize that people were copying sprites onto graph paper even back in the eighties? You could easily see individual pixels on Genesis games if your TV wasn't a blurry pile of shit.

IMG: a blurry piece of shit

>>466332

Okay, the Cg shaders don't work on AMD cards because they use OpenGL >2.0 and NVidia only ever implemented a GLSL 1.1 compile target profile for Cg. So any newer features aren't available when using OpenGL and a non-NVidia GPU.

The first error I get are runtime-dynamic indices in the first fragment shader file. This would pose no problem on most GPUs from the last 4 years but NVidia's cross-compiler in the glslf profile handles this as an error.

The Retroarch people should really switch to GLSL if they want to keep their shaders cross-platform.

So far I haven't been successful with using a XML/GLSL shader in Retroarch though. All I get is a black screen and no error messages.

>>466620
dam what filter is that???

>>465076
>This elitism

I thought I stopped visiting /g/.

I just don't like the look of filters, I actually prefer pixels.

Don't hate, don't judge.

>>466629

Hmm.. There is a GLSL version option for Cg. Let's see what Retroarch uses here..

I like my pixels razor fucking sharp. That, and a lot of filters look like ass. I'm not a fan of a lot of the NTSC or scanline filters either. I think the HQX ones are okay for some things (EarthBound and Yoshi's Island were mentioned. I'll throw in Kirby's Dreamland 3, as well). I just prefer the unfiltered look.

>>466629
>So far I haven't been successful with using a XML/GLSL shader in Retroarch though. All I get is a black screen and no error messages.

I had a few of them working fine when I was using it on my HD7950. I only tried one or two of them to fix pixel width/hight issues I was having because I wasn't using integer scaling.

>>466674
>Yoshi's Island

>>464795

It is because... autism

I was actually alive when these games came out and I still don't give a shit between the filters and the pixelation. Entirely indifferent.

>>466687
Well, yeah, when you zoom it in and stretch it, of course it's going to look bad. In motion, I honestly don't think it looks that bad. And to show you just how good it is in motion, I'm going to post a screenshot.

>>466738
I think that looks hideous, myself.

Opinions.

>>466738
I really hope you're joking.

>>466738
That doesn't look good at all.

>>466748
Fair enough.

I'll give you that, for most things, it looks horrible. I just thing some games are alright with it. Not that I use them myself, still, since I like my pixels sharp enough to cut, I'm just saying. That said for the perfect example of games that look horrible with filters, the first thought that comes to mind is the Donkey Kong games (or any other pseudo 3D games). I wish I had that "LOOKING GOOD" picture of Funky Kong.

>>466756
I'm not.

>>466757
Opinions, etc.

guys check out this retro video game it looks just like im playing it on a real old tv

>>466772
oh christ what did you do

>>466767
I'll give you that Yoshi's Island takes to it better than most other games, but it still looks hideous.

>>465618
emulatorfag here. I always play my games at the highest resolution and sometimes will filter, but only because i have really bad eyes and if something isn't at a high enough resolution it simply strains my eyes. this is why I'm 100% for all the HD rereleases ps3 does and why i have to emulate my n64 games (though i have a perfectly good n64 right next to me). That being said, to each his own, and anyone arguing that filters are master race is an idiot. It's all a matter of personal preference, and to be honest, the monitor i'm using right now talking to you isn't HD enough for my shitty eyes. Obviously this whole board is for those of us who have grown up in the 90's and earlier, though if you are younger, and can show a legitimate interest in retro gaming, we won't bite your heads off. That being said,
>pixelated mess
>OP is a faggot

>>466226
I have 20/200 vision without corrective lenses. Without my glasses and at the very edge of my vision where it starts to blur I was still able to tell that the sign says "INN".

You have problems if you can't tell what it says.

>>466779
Fair enough. I think it'd work better if the edges were smoother rather than kind of rubbed, if you get what I mean. For example, if Shy Guy's mask was actually round rather than "Kind of weirdly shaped but almost round in pixel art but it's not pixel art so it's weird".

>>466785
>You have problems if you can't tell what it says.
And not even eye problems.

reginald-brainproblems.png

>>466226
>>466231

The first one is more readable to me with my glasses on. The blurring in the second image makes it harder for my eyes because it feels like I'm squinting. I can read both just fine with my glasses off, though, although barely. I don't see what the issue is in the first one.

>>465845
Figured I'd ask, but what about pseudo 2D games, like BoF3 and 4 where you have sprites and 3D?

>>466669
>>466683

Okay, the Cg shaders compile when I override the Cg profile in shader_cg.c to "glslf" and "glslv" respectively.


/* cgFProf = cgGLGetLatestProfile(CG_GL_FRAGMENT); */
/* cgVProf = cgGLGetLatestProfile(CG_GL_VERTEX);<wbr> */

cgFProf = cgGetProfile("glslf");
cgVProf = cgGetProfile("glslv");


Cg apparently picks the completely outdated "arbvp1" and "arbfp1" profiles when using cgGLGetLatestProfile(), otherwise.

I still get a black screen, just like when using XML/GLSL. I guess this is the same problem. I will look into this.

Let's turn this shit on it's head, I want my fancy HD graphics to look like some shithead mosaic'd the shit outta it but still make it plausible I can make details out, WHAT FILTERS DO I USE FOR THAT?!

>>465987

>>465836
Xebra

It just works flawlessly with any game

>>465939
Not bad at all sir, care to share your ini file with us?

>>466880
she's alot less good looking then I thought. I googled her. kinda meh

>>466972
She's got nice tits though.

>>466620
Beautiful.

>>466979
havent seen them.. and nice tits doesnt offset the rest of her lack of looks.

>>466995

Much too much focus on the face comin' out of you

>>466031
>Games with high detail don't work as well because of the smudging.
At the same time, games like DKC are the only ones that look like shit on a modern display. SMW etc. look just fine.

>>465672
>no curve

Disgusting, and no point

>>466035
>>466038
Dear god, do you really prefer the blurry mess to the crisp, clean image?

>>466940
http://www.tested.com/tech/gaming/2982-a-link-to-the-past-how-to-add-crt-filters-to-16-bit-games-on-pc/
see The Arcade Dream part

>>465602
Did you get those two mixed up? I can't fathom how anyone could stomach 2XSal

>>467024

the problem being that the "crisp" image makes the waterfall look like a bunch of laser beams while the "blurry" one actually replicates the whole fake transparency thing that was meant to be

>>466779

well duh. you'll never find one absolute filter that works for all which is why so many different ones exist (or the option of using none at all)

I think the biggest argument for using filters though is that when emulating older games you'll never be able to replicate how well CRTs managed to resized whatever weird aspect ratio the console outputted its graphics to the 4:3 format. It will always leave you with wonky horizontal pixels due to the stretching, common screen DPIs of today simply aren't high enough for that. The only way we have around this problem is filters really.

Any recommended filters for android devices?
it's a different ball game when tinkering with a 7" screen instead of a monitor.

>>464795
I think I am the only one here willing to admit is for nostalgia's sake. That, and I think the games were meant to be played with the pixel art on a CRT tv... But that is just me, I don't give a fuck what you do with your spare time. Filter away, person who isn't me, and whose choices have literally no impact on my life.

>>467195

Modern mobile phones usually have high enough DPIs that a CRT or scanline shader might look actually good. Could never get them to work with Retroarch though on my Galaxy S3

>>466767
>Opinions

Your "Get out of argument free" card isn't valid here, pleb.

>>466852

Okay, I've now solved the problem with the non-working XML/GLSL. Turns out I didn't use an up-to-date version of retroarch.

The Cg shader still only shows a black screen, though. No idea why it doesn't work.

Wow. This thread. Autists who weren't alive when these systems came out, trying to convince everyone that filtered matches the original intent of the artists, console designers, etc.

Find another fucking hobby, this one is particularly obnoxious to those of us who were actually around to play these systems when they came out.

>>467668
What is your opinion on square pixels vs rectangular pixels?

some games look great with filters, others don't.
smb3 doesn't.

>>467668
>Autists who weren't alive when these systems came out, trying to convince everyone that filtered matches the original intent of the artists, console designers, etc

No but I have played NES games on a real console with a CRT TV

>>467668
I played the original consoles on a TV.
I don't remember them looking like the unfiltered, pixelated mess.

I use filters, and I don't fucking care, CPS2 is the only thing that looks good unfiltered

>>467668
Wow. This thread. Autists who argue about filters.

>>465919
convert ct.png -sample 1600x1200\! -colorspace RGB -gaussian-blur 3x0.8 -resize 800x600 -colorspace sRGB ctresized.png

Beautiful. Correct aspect ratio, no ugly scanlines, just enough blur to hide the non-integer scaling artifacts (which are very minor anyway because of the integer ratio nearest neighbor prescaling), color correct final scaling.

But it doesn't run in real time, so in actual play I use bilinear for the final step with no additional blur, which looks very similar other than incorrect colors in some places.

It's hilarious how people put so much effort into simulating CRT image quality but completely ignore CRT motion quality. If it doesn't flicker like a CRT it's going to look like shit in motion. 120Hz LCD + black frame insertion master race.

>>464847
>A vast majority of people, here and elsewhere, like these games because we're nostalgic towards them

I think it's important to preserve the experience of the game as closely as possible to how it was originally intended.

Playing on original hardware is always the best option for this. However, that's becoming progressively less and less convenient.

For that reason, emulation is fine. I emulate as well, but I never use image filters.

And God forbid you use save states or speed alteration.

>>464847
>A vast majority of people, here and elsewhere, like these games because we're nostalgic towards them, and therefore love how they
originally look

That is completely incorrect.

People like these games because they are good games. The notion that most people only like older games because of nostalgia is completely unfounded and paints retro vidya in a very shallow light.

Haven't you had a video game that you liked as a child but then played it years later and hated it?

>>468016
>However, that's becoming progressively less and less convenient
Yeah well when you're a nignog and cannot into condom use and have 5 nigglets running around your public housing unit and stepping on your Japanese Saturn discs...

>>468025
>The notion that most people only like older games because of nostalgia is completely unfounded

Partially true. Certain games only seem good because of nostalgia, including:

*90% of Atari games
*Yuropoor shit on the Sinclair Spectrum or whatever
*Goldeneye
*MK64
*Pokemon RBY
*Kiddie eduware

>>468045
>*90% of Atari games
>*Yuropoor shit on the Sinclair Spectrum or whatever
>*Goldeneye
>*MK64
>*Pokemon RBY
>*Kiddie eduware
But not same person likes these. You're jsut proving his point, really.

>>468058
>But not same person likes these

that terrible feel when no reading comprehension

i don't see the point

>>465861
That wouldn't look like a circle in a real TV.
The artist for that game is indeed second rate.

>>464795
Nice false dichotomy there, chief.

Arguing over Sony PVM models or whatever people do in CRT threads is pretty silly considering that if you want the authentic 80s vidya experience, you would be using something more along the lines of this.

>>468045

>90% of Atari games

Fuck you, Atari games are awesome. Still had that nifty arcade mindset.

>Sinclair Spectrum

Wouldn't know.

>Goldeneye

Only because Perfect Dark is better.

>MK64

That game is still great, fuck you.

>Pokemon RBY

Only because Pokemon games literally get better with each gen.

>>468102
>Sinclair Spectrum
>Wouldn't know

Britbro here. They suck.

>minimum scanlines
>NTSC-Composite
>maybe that ugly smoothing shit, but only with the above

anything else in unacceptable.

Also filters on 3D or handheld titles is just wrong.

>>466824
That's up to preference, and sometimes depends on the game. If the game incorporates a LOT of 3D alongside the sprites, you might want to consider PCSX-R, but it's up to you. FFT I can comfortably play on RetroArch, since its 3D is pretty rudimentary and not all too prominent.

It's the games that use a ton of 2D backgrounds, though, that are the real issue. Games such as Resident Evil and the Final Fantasies are hell, the latter especially so since they also feature a lot of fully 3D environments in the world map and battles. I still run those on PCSX-R because of its 32-bit color rendering removing a lot of ugly dithering, but with a CRT shader on top for the backgrounds.

>>467375
But there really isn't any real discussion from that, though. It's ultimately preference. You either think it looks good or you don't. That said, your post was just bait anyway, so I don't know why I bothered responding.

But alright.

>>468178
>Also filters on 3D... is just wrong.
What the fuck sort of ass-backwards fuck are you? Filters ON 2D are bad, filters on 3d actually do in fact work.

>>468230
Alright, fair enough. I have a lot of RPGs that do 3D models on 2D backgrounds and 2D sprites on 3D environments, so I was just wondering what others did. For 3D on 2D, I'll probably just stick with PCSX-R like I have been. For 2D on 3D, I'll probably start using RetroArch since I've been using the software plugin in PCSX-R for those anyway.

I bet all the faggots that don't use filters also use ZSNES.

>>468304
I don't use any filters. I use the Pixelate shader to fix issues due to using non-integer scaling. Beyond that, I use the bSNES core in RetroArch.

>>468309
Yeah, 2D on 3D is manageable enough, but 3D on 2D is just, goddamn.

There's two types of settings I switch between for this kind of game. One is to turn up the internal resolution and blur the shit out of the backgrounds (only looks good at 640x480)...

>>468342
...the other is to keep the internal resolution at native, and apply a CRT shader. Backgrounds look great at high resolutions this way, but 3D looks meh.

>>468358
Turning up internal resolution results in better 3D, but more pixelated backgrounds. Oh well.

Excuse the dark scanlines in this shot. I hadn't modified them to be lighter at the time.

>>468342
>>468358

Yeah, I still don't really have any good solution for that. I tend to pay attention to the models or characters a lot, though, and running games like that in Mednafen look weird to me because I'm looking at the models. For sprites and the like, I dislike filtering, but for 3D, I almost need my models to be clean and visible.

It's either have shitty scaling for the backgrounds or have a pixelated mess for the models.

I don't use shaders because I don't have a reason to.

Get
at
me

>>468376
>arguing
Barrett in the village people?

>Top Tier

Playing a game on its original hardware.

>High tier

Playing a game on an emulator on a large screen with an appropriate input device that at least mirrors the game's originally intended controller. Alternatively, if it's a handheld game, playing it on a PSP emulator.

>Mid tier

Playing a game on an emulator on a tiny computer screen with mouse + KB.

>Low tier

Same as mid tier, but with image filters.

>Unforgivable tier

Same as low tier, but with savestates.

Pixellate shader is the best shader

Lets you keep the pixellated look even at non-integer scales without uneven pixels

The pixels look better than squiggly lines caused by the filters. It's incredibly distasteful.

You have to remember these sprites were designed with pixelation in mind.

Also, this seems to have become a phenomena amongst 90s born kids getting into emulation - indicating that they think Flash games look better than retro games.

It's incredibly fucked up.

>>469270
And that's why it's my favorite fucking shader.
The anon who first pointed it out to me is still my hero.

>>469310
>You have to remember these sprites were designed with pixelation in mind.
No, they did not. They were designed to be displayed in an NTSC TV. A filter or shader that emulates a CRT TV is better than unfiltered, pixelated mess.

i love the retro pokemon games

>>469386
Not the guy you're replying to, but I tend to disagree. I really like the look of pixels and pixel art. I'm not a fan of using CRT filters, though. On an actual CRT monitor, things look fine. But the filter just looks off to me and I'd rather have my stuff clean.

That said, I can understand why somebody would use shaders and filters for the original feel. I also understand for cases like the Sonic waterfall. I just prefer mine unfiltered.

>>469386
[citation needed]

This is the filter I have running most of the time.
I was actually really impressed by CRT TVs recently, the dithering in the pixel art actually smooths out pretty nicely.

>>469448
>I didn't read the thread.

>>469386
More like they were designed to run at a lower resolution that doesn't look like a pixelated mess.

>>469448
Alright, champ. Let's hear what you think they were designed to be displayed on.

Actually I use filters to some emulators, mainly for SNES& Megadrive. I don't have any problem playing 8bit consoles like NES with their original graphics.

And while not an emulator, playing Guardian Heroes on my XBox360 with the HD graphics (aka filters) is much better than playing with the original graphics which were a pain in the eye with all this pixelated panic. If only there was an HD re-release for Rakugaki Showtime.

>>465598
It clearly says INN.

>>469567
Is that Tactics Ogre, Let Us Cling Together?
I thought they stopped translating it

>>469632
Knight of Lodis

>>469632
Let us cling together wasn't for GBA.
The GBA game was another one I can't remember.

If you're talking about the SNES version of the game, though, that got fan translated.

http://www.romhacking.net/translations/1501/

IIRC, it's just the US PS1 version's script cleaned up and inserted into the SNES version, but it's fan-translated.

>I prefer my games darker, smudged, and blurred because that's how they where intended to be seen.
If you insist.

>>469640
Oh, phhhbt
Didn't like that one as much (mostly I remember the final boss being a bore)

>>465539
>>465547
>>465438
Some Game Boy games use flickering sprites to give the illusion of transparency.

In Link's Awakening, there's a ghost that follows you. If you play it in an emulator with no filters, it looks like it's flickering. But on an actual Game Boy, it would look transparent.

>>469678
>But on an actual Game Boy, it would look transparent.
Kinda.
It was still pretty obvious there was a flicker. Then again I only played the DX version.

>>465664
The title screen says FFIII. That's what it was called.

>>469702
was

>>465489
Holy Jesus, who the fuck cares.

If you were playing Ultima in 1991, nobody would have gone "WWEEEEEEEENG IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE PLAYED ON AN 80's AMBER PLASMA CRT POLYMETRIC SCREEN, YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE EXPERIENCE THE DEVS INTENDEEED"

"Authenticity" is just /vr/'s version of "lol so retro"

>>469721
Oh if only you weren't a tripfag.

>>469721
Amen.

If you like to put CRT filters on you games, well alright, but don't parade it around like "games were meant to be played like this" bullshit.

>>469739
Especially because they can't emulate that display for shit.

>>469721

I'll just play some SNES Ultima with scanlines. That'll show you.

>>469770
:o

>>469770
>ultima on snes

pls god no dont do it man

Well hey, you know, I use CRT-style filters on my emulators. But I try not to be one of those filter-nazis who says everyone who doesn't filter is a poseur.

CRTs don't even look like scanline clusterfucks unless you sit with your nose touching the glass...
This isn't ancient tech here people.
Photos and video of CRTs look weird but in real life nah man

>>469793
There are people who think not using a filter makes one a poser? Oh, god; that's almost sad.

>>469801
>CRTs don't even look like scanline clusterfucks unless you sit with your nose touching the glass...
Neither does good CRT emulation.

>>469504

Oh, so because you think some jap in the mid 90's made a game that played on the only display available at the time, that means that you should emulate scanlines on a snes emulator? I'm sure he sat there working overtime, sleeping under his desk, and ruining his relationship with his wife going "how can I design sonic so his look works with scanlines".

Generally people didn't do that. Same for the N64 and PSX era as well.

I turn filters on for some games, and off for others
Depends what I think looks better

And I'll likely do it again in the future
Again and again, turning those filters on and off like it was going out of style

>>469832
He said "emulates a CRT TV", not "scanlines".
Strawman arguments should stay on /v/, please.

Games weren't developed on shitty RCA sets the average living room was using so what's all this "it was developed for this tech" nonsense

>>470004
Any decent developer (Sunsoft springs to mind almost immediately as an example of a developer that does this both consistently and appropriately) would look not at the device they use to create the games, but that the end product would be used on, and design their graphics accordingly.

>>470004
No but I'm sure they were tested on typical consumer TVs of the period and that in any case was what people mostly used them on.

>>470004
FFS developers are not fucking retards.
Do you also think that graphic designers do not check how their work looks on print? That they don't spend time and money calibrating the color profiles of all the devices in their workflow?
That webmonkeys don't check how their site looks on firefox, ie, opera, and chrome?
They are clearly more intelligent than you.

>>470051
>Do you also think that graphic designers do not check how their work looks on print? That they don't spend time and money calibrating the color profiles of all the devices in their workflow?
Pfft no, why would they do that! They don't design their work using a printer, why on earth would they check to see how the output looks on some other device!

>>470004
Look up the thread where some retard like you claimed that developers didn't even take into account the fact the the displayed pixels are not square. Clearly the developers took that, and more, into account when designing the graphics.

I dislike the way those smooth filters look, and I just simply prefer the original. Don't fix what isn't broken.

>>470026
>>470028
>>470051
Way to miss the point. People are saying that the artifacts and limitations were PART of the art. They aren't. Should it look good on any TV? Yes. But that's not saying those warping effects and scanlines were PART of the image.
High end TVs would advertise about less distortion around the edges. Wouldn't that diminish the developer's supposed ideal of how the game looked if those limitations were part of the original vision?

>>470104
Are you going to claim that the real "art" is an hexdump of the rom? After all, that data isn't tarnished by imperfect displays.

>>470104
You are missing the point. When you create artwork for a publication, you take into account the kind of printing process you are going to use and choose your typefaces, graphics, etc accordingly. It is not different when the graphics are displayed on a TV screen.

>>470124
>Are you going to claim that the real "art" is an hexdump of the rom?
No. Why would I? You're trying really hard to find something to argue about.
And what's with the "art" quotations? Games have art in them.

>>470147
The image should work DESPITE the flaws. TVs were a lot more varied in output back then so saying scanlines, blurring and other bullshit is "right" is incorrect. They aren't intended parts of the game. The games work fine with them because those flaws were taken into account but some of you idiots are acting like those flaws are FEATURES of games back then.

>>470175
Some games did use the behavior of CRT televisions and lossy output as a feature. In fact, many did, utilizing various color-blending techniques and taking advantage of other oddities with the output.

At the very least, any competently designed game was designed to look correct on a television, not a pixel-accurate monitor.

>>470175
You are beyond retarded. The properties of the TV and the console are intended parts of the game: resolution, refresh rate, color pallete, memory, input latency, etc. You design your game around all those restrictions: you program what can be programmed on the console with acceptable performance and you display what can be displayed on the TV.
Learn at least some engineering or design. You don't build perfect castles in the sky, you work with what you have available and what they had available for display was NTSC TVs.

>>470237
That's exactly what I'm saying. Those things were taken into account. Yes. BUT one TV may not have had the same limits as the others. I've got three CRTs and all three look different.

I've been messing around with the HLSL based CRT filters in MAME, I loaded the same game on my PS1 displayed through a PVM and paused it, tweaking till the colors and scanline/aperture looked close. I'd post a comparison pic but my phone sucks at taking pics of my PVM

>>470273
>one TV may not have had the same limits as the others
No, pretty much all NTSC standard color televisions using certain output formats had the same general behavior and quirks, actually.

>>470290
Maybe if all were bought a year or two apart and at the same price range.
TVs varied plenty and stuff like flicker and color were not constant.

>>470331
For fucking real. Anyone with an Amiga monitor didn't have to put up with half the bullshit people with a Zenith console TV did.

>>470284
Mind sharing the HLSL settings?

>>470479
Sure, this is the pertinent part from my mame.ini

Change the resolution to whatever yours actually is


#
# DIRECT3D POST-PROCESSING OPTIONS
#
hlsl_enable 1
hlslpath hlsl
hlsl_ini_read 0
hlsl_ini_write 0
hlslini %g
hlsl_prescale_x 3
hlsl_prescale_y 3
hlsl_preset -1
hlsl_write 0
hlsl_snap_width 1680
hlsl_snap_height 1050
shadow_mask_alpha 0.08
shadow_mask_texture aperture.png
shadow_mask_x_count 600
shadow_mask_y_count 240
shadow_mask_usize 0.09375
shadow_mask_vsize 0.09375
curvature 0.0
pincushion 0.00
scanline_alpha 0.73
scanline_size 1.0
scanline_height 0.7
scanline_bright_scale 1.10
scanline_bright_offset 0.60
scanline_jitter 0.0
defocus 0.0,0.0
converge_x 0.0,0.0,0.0
converge_y 0.0,0.0,0.0
radial_converge_x 0.0,0.0,0.0
radial_converge_y 0.0,0.0,0.0
red_ratio 1.0,0.0,0.0
grn_ratio 0.0,1.0,0.0
blu_ratio 0.0,0.0,1.0
saturation 1.0
offset 0.0,0.0,0.0
scale 1.0,1.0,1.0
power 1.0,1.0,1.0
floor 0.0,0.0,0.0
phosphor_life 0.0,0.0,0.0
yiq_enable 0
yiq_cc 3.59754545
yiq_a 0.5
yiq_b 0.5
yiq_o 0.0
yiq_p 1.0
yiq_n 1.0
yiq_y 6.0
yiq_i 1.2
yiq_q 0.6
yiq_scan_time 52.6
yiq_phase_count 2

>>470682
here's a a screencap

>>470812
God I loved that game so much.

>>470812
>Sexy Parodius

Good taste/10 anon.

>>470812
Sweet. Only problem is, the phosphor texture looks off, but that's most likely because I changed the resolution. I know you have to edit the shadow mask usize and vsize accordingly. How do you determine what setting to use?

>>470868
Had to use the white texture to get rid of the issues, but I'd love to get the phosphor texture working well. I just don't understand the settings enough, and the documentation of the HLSL shader is very poor.

>>470932
No TV ever looked like that

>>470959
It's an approximation of an aperture grille PVM monitor, although much higher resolution is needed to produce an even more faithful effect.

>>470932
>>470868
Gotta be honest, I have trouble seeing the merits of accurate output for N64 when the emulation itself is so horrible and inaccurate to begin with.

>>470932
Actually I messed up the numbers in my config, I was trying to pick the same resolution as my PVM but mixed it up. It should be 640x200 for the aperture dimensions.

But you're right that you need a high res monitor for it to look correct, just tweak the shadow mask alpha and scanline alpha since it looks different depending on what res you're running it at

>>471075
MESS is actually pretty damn accurate, but it's slow as fuck and some games crash or don't start up.

But worry not, there are several efforts toward attaining accurate N64 emulation in the works. Hopefully within a year we'll have significantly progressed after years of stagnation.

>>465836
PSXFIN yes i know its a bit old but no playing with anything just config the controlls and attach the the iso image. no filters.

>>470959

Mine looks roughly like that, so obviously that statement is false.

Is there a way to make an emulator output to a real TV?

>>471242
Of course, with any compatible capture card.
Making it output CORRECTLY to a real TV, on the other hand, takes some finesse.

>>471242
Mod chips

>>471242
Set your video card to output a 15KHz signal. Go straight from VGA port to RGB/SCART, or through a component or NTSC encoder if your television lacks RGB.

>>471242

Short answer : No.
Long answer : Not without outputting 15khz RGB over VGA, splitting the cables and having a TV that accepts 15khz RGB.

Unless you don't mind dealing with heavily underscanned and interlaced output over typical TV-out setups.

>>471249
Your tv is broken then

>>471242
I've got an old VGA to AV adaptor and that is hooked up to an RF modulator....
Seems to work well enough

>>471294

Hmm, no. Maybe yours is if it doesn't look like that. Or maybe it's a shitty shadow mask TV, those have problems with scanlines bleeding together.

I don't put any filters on, be it shitty TV scanline party or smudgy vaseline. I just want to play the damn game.

I didn't know /vr/ cared this much about graffix.

>>471302
Does it give you a progressive picture?

>>471308
Scanlines are never that fucking obvious and the image is never that fucking dark on a real screen

>>471340
If you sat as close to a PVM as you currently are to your monitor viewing such an image, they would be.

Not saying it looks perfect or anything, though.

>>471289
>TV that accepts 15khz RGB.
Which TV models usually have this feature?

>>471340

They're easy to see on quality TVs like Sony's Trinitron or PVM. If you have a shit TV that bleeds together scanlines, they won't be very visible.
If that image is dark to you, your monitor needs calibration, It doesn't look very dark on my screen.

>>471356

European TVs, Sony PVM/BVM monitors

>>471356
15KHz just means SDTV frequency (480i60 / 240p60, 576i50 / 288p25).

Most European TVs and professional monitors can accept a raw RGB signal. American TVs will need some kind of encoder (either to component, S-video, or composite).

>>471414
>Trinitron
>obscure super high end
Did you grow up in Uganda or something?

>>471354
Most normal people didn't sit that close to the tv (unless they were playing Duck Hunt lol)
>>471367
And who in the world actually had obscure super high end sets in their living rooms? Not many

Is there a good way to play snes games without horrid stretching in 1080p?

>>471513
Pixellate shader

>>469270

http://gitorious.org/bsnes/xml-shaders/blobs/master/shaders/OpenGL/v1.0/Pixellate.shader

>>471513
buy a real TV

>>469386
Jesus, you really won't quit will you?

Do you think the designers were actually working with crappy TV sets? No. They were designing those sprites pixel by pixel on computers. Of course pixelation was intended, you fucking dolt.