/vr/ - Retro Games

Zero latency, no blur.

>>7137246
Yeah, they're legit. The advantages are well-documented and I'm pretty sure subsequent posters will explain them better than I could. If nothing else, they're pleasant to look at and use.

>>7137267
let's see those waterfalls, anon

>>7137246
Both. There are many obvious benefits but part of it is nostalgia as well. CRT's are different visually and give a different experience. Playing old games is one of their only real uses in the modern era. Which why paying a lot for them whilst there's still plenty out there is retarded.

>>7137246

Either heavy, cumbersome, and space-wasting or tiny and expensive. Most things people claim CRT's do better than a good quality digital display have either already been matched or will be matched within a decade, if that long.

The sets are failing, nostalgia is fading, and newer technology is keeping up. The only people left behind are consolefags that haven't upgraded to HDMI out or invested in a decent upscaler yet.

>>7137275

>>7137246
getting electrocuted

>>7137246
Having no input lag makes a huge difference when it comes to playing platformers. Try playing Mario or Sonic on native hardware and a CRT after you've played it on an emulator. It'll feel like the characters started moving before you even pressed the button.
They're also super comfy for watching old 4:3 TV-shows on.
Of course, I wouldn't keep one in the living room, but the difference they do for retro games in particular is pretty big.
Americans have it a bit worse when it comes to image quality though, thanks to them refusing to use SCART for whatever reason.

Fixed pixel displays just suck. Until some better technology replaces them, sticking with CRTs is the way to go. They look great and you don't need to worry about an entire retarded setup just to properly scale your image and get your inputs in.
>>7137335
Non-issues. You ask a friend to help you move it once, and then you are done. Space is a non-issue assuming you don't live in a bugman pod. Good sized consumer sets are small by flat panel standards.

>>7137246
>their filters
It may just be me, but the CRT filters hurt my eyes. It feels like I'm straining to see through a haze to play the game. Real CRTs never had that effect.

Little to no lag, no black bars, and the fact that games were designed around them to achieve an intended look. Nostalgia and period accuracy matters too

>>7137246
The funny part is they're not a "boomer meme" at all. They're for the kids who weren't alive at the time trying to recreate what they think was the most "authentic" experience. You used whatever monitor you bought with your computer. Your consoles got hooked up to whatever television your parents had in the living room. That's your actual "authentic" experience.

>>7137402
>refusing
We already had long-established standards by the time Europe got SCART, it wasn't practical or desirable to introduce it.

>>7137402
Lmao better to have composite then your 50hz Slow motion shit machines

>>7137246
-No input lag
-No motion blur
-Better color and contrast
-No fixed resolution so they display everything crisp without scaling
-No fixed refresh rate so scrolling is always perfect
-Overall mage quality is vastly superior

>>7137246
it's the same as ask an audiophile if his giant and inconvenient setup is legit better.

>>7137246
>advantages
No one ever reddit spaced on a CRT TV

>>7137753
>-No input lag
>>7137424
>no lag
>>7137402
>no input lag
>>7137259
>Zero latency

How are people on this website so misinformed? CRTs have over 8ms of latency. There is less than a 1ms difference in lag between a CRT and LCD, it's unnoticeable.

https://forums.blurbusters.com/viewtopic.php?t=7036#p57510

I tried playing samurai showdown 5 on an lcd and it just looked bad, I find lcd can still look good for old pc games though.

>>7137918
>random forum user said thing

I use an LCD with a scaler for everything btw

>>7137918
fuck off retard

>>7137246
Low latency, even pixels at any resolution, low resolution content has aesthetically pleasing scanlines, vivid colors, bright whites, great contrast. OLED's the only way up, but you have to baby those and avoid static elements.

>>7137918
I can assure you that's not the case with most LCDs, *especially* TVs. Only since 2018 or so have TVs gotten commonly low (enough) lag.

>>7137937
That's largely because old PC games and their 31khz monitors had far subtler scanlines, and they're almost invisible at 1024x768+. If you use integer scaling, old PC content on an LCD doesn't look as drastically far off as old console/arcade games do. Those usually leaned on composite artifacts, had very distinct scanlines between each pixel, and lots of (perhaps overly) saturated colors and glowy whites on a CRT.

>>7137246
Smash bros meet ups still use CRT to this day, anyone using anything else needs to be ignored.

>>7137275
At a glance I would guess he's using too good a cable for that.

>>7137335
You can't upscale an art style. Filters are the next best thing.

>>7137246
personally, I love my bvm.

>>7137918
From my experience the lag on lcd is very noticeable. Old games that rely on quickness and reflexes are unplayable

>>7138296
He's comparing it to like the top of the top desktop LCDs
>playing console games at a desk
It's a much different story on LCDs, in the TV space, and if you don't shop for one with low latency in particular.

Talking out his ass.

>>7137246
>reddit
>
>zoom
>
>posting
>
>expecting
>
>a
>
>serious
>
>answer
wew lad

>>7138296
I think its only Zoomers hating on CRT.

I once played dreamcast on a projector. That was the most unplayable shit ever.

>>7137735
most shit will run 60hz, so there are ways around being locked at 50hz at the present date. But in the past then yes. Americans got normal speed we got better quality everything was a fucking tradeoff.

Brainlet here. If CRTs don't have a fixed resolution then what the fuck is a shadow mask

>>7139865
It is a physical barrier that focuses the light beams into a color image. It doesn't have pixels or any connection whatsoever to the image that is coming in from the input. It is all analog. CRTs have an effective "resolution" based on how precise the color separation can be, but it isn't the same thing as a pixel resolution and isn't directly comparable to one.

>>7139870
To add as to why this isn't "fixed". It is because it doesn't care about pixels. A 256x224 SNES input and a 320x224 Genesis input are treated exactly the same and both outputed "natively" with no stretching. And in fact, the CRT can natively output all sorts of weird resolutions used by retro consoles. The resolution in these cases is the internal resolution of the digital image created by the console. The television doesn't know what a pixel is and doesn't care as long as the analog signal is in the right format.