/vr/ - Retro Games

>>7745716
bilinear filtering is all you need. scanlines arent visible in real life.

>>7745718
t. never owned a crt

That's what happens when you don't integer scale. That's not onions that's stupidity.

>>7745723

>>7745734
You can see the scanlines right in that image. Keep chugging that onions.

>>7745716
>>7745734
>oh no scanlines hurt my fragile eyes!
zoomers are weak mind faggots.

>>7745750
There's no scanlines in OP's image, fagbag.

I don't know, I really like shaders. I think raw emulator output tends to look pretty awful honestly

>>7745734
Next time you want to fail to make a point try to post a less glitchy image.

>>7745746
In a picture yes, but the scanlines actually move

>>7745804
>but the scanlines actually move
????????????

>>7745804
Where do they move to, anon?

>>7745880
My fucking sides.

>>7745880
To the end of the stage, obviously.

Raw emulator chad reporting in. The very first thing I do when I download a new emulator is disabling bilinear filtering.

>>7745930
Same.

>>7745716
Who the fuck drinks onions? Do you brush your teeth with garlic too?

>>7745880
Florida, probably

>>7746050
>Do you brush your teeth with garlic too?

>>7745716
1. Why would you drink onions?
2. WHY THE FUCK IS ANYONE FALLING FOR THE FUCKING FILTER IN 2021 JUST ACCEPT THAT YOU WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO USE THAT BUZZWORD AGAIN AND STOP TRYING TO USE IT TO FIT IN YOU UNIRONICALLY UNDERAGED PIECE OF REDDIT SHIT

>>7745790
shader name?

>>7745716
don't give a shit if it's accurate that looks good

>>7745718
this pretty much desu. If you sit at a normal distance from a crt tv you don't see any shadow masks and no scanlines since they're interlaced and blur into each other.

>>7746983
>and no scanlines since they're interlaced and blur into each other.
Huh, I take that back. I never owned an NES, but it looks like the NES actually outputted a 240p signal to the TV or actually more like a 480p signal with every other line black. The more you know.

How do you drink onions?

>>7745723
American crt's seem to have huge visible scanlines.

Here in UK/EU our crt's never had visible scanlines at all

Pixel perfect is the real meme for soifaces

If you hate filters so much stop being a whiny bitch and play on real hardware then tell us about all the crisp pixels

The least autistic side is always right, in this case it must be filter users because they never spend their time seething about people like you

>>7745734
No one sat that close to the TV you dumbass.

>>7747181
show us your filter anon. I can tell you use them.

>>7747576
>He didnt grow up in a tiny living room

>>7747018
This. It was also evident when they played a US advert on UK televisions, the quality was visually worse.

>Zoomers literally think lower image looks better than upper image because they took mockery of HQ2X at face value and converted it into a dogma of all filters being bad no matter their nature

>integer scaling to nearest resolution

>>7747832
The ultimate zoomer take is thinking bottom looks bad because pixels = bad.

>>7747839
You're right, it looks bad because of the jaggies and unblended dithering.

>>7747839

>>7745780
you sure?

>>7745930
me too

>>7747867
This.
There are certain types of faggots that have serious issues understanding this fact even when looking the indisputable fact in right in the face, I don't know if it's gaslighting RGB shillers astroturfing or over opinionated retards stuck in a compulsive contrarian loop.

I remember when this board was good and not just endless "are savestates cheating" and "are filters good" bait shitflinging threads

>>7748165
We need a retro retro games board.

>>7748198
I was skeptical until this one.
>the globe having visible landmasses
>the lamp/candelabra giving off light
>the light coming in from the window
I know this is probably a shader on top of a filter but damn.

>>7748198
What filter/shader?

>>7747595
Depends on the game really but it's not like I need to create threads looking for validation

Also I mostly play everdrives on real hardware anyway.

>>7745723
I owned one as a kid and a teenager and I don't remember scanlines at all on either of them. It was one of those CRTs where if you looked reaaaaal close at the screen it was horizontal bars in a beehive pattern if that makes any difference.

>>7746083
>>7746050
Blame the retard that owns this site and the bigger retards that spammed a word so much it got wordfiltered.

>>7749749
>horizontal bars in a beehive pattern
Lottes.

>>7749780
The shitty Sharp TV we owned looked like this. I preferred the Trinitron. What filter for that?

>>7749829
Oh, there's lottes of filters to choose from.

>>7745790
that'd look really nice on an oled with good motion clarity

>>7748401
ive used rn forever but what the fuck does no cap or ion mean
i know enough ebonics to know finna is "fixin tuh"

onions is onions

>>7749761
we have an answer.

>>7750279
fuck, wrong one.

>>7750281
I doubt this. Wordfilters/instabans have been used on 4chan for a long time to curb samey posts with everyone trying the new word they learned. This is just the only one that's stuck for this long, which has less to do with how incensed people are about it and more to do with how little the administration does at all on this website anymore.

>>7748190
>>7748192
>>7748198
>NOOOOOOOOO YOU'RE RUINING MY CHILDHOOD WITH YOUR FILTERS!!! PLAYING THEM WITH ZSNES IS THE WAY I REMEMBER THEM!!

>>7750303
Who are you quoting?

>>7748165
me too

>>7749761
>and the bigger retards that spammed a word so much it got wordfiltered.
Yet they never did the same to 'based' and that's been spammed way more than the 's' word ever was. Retarded as fuck.

>>7750303

>>7750315
Maybe they did it on purpose to annoy people. The same way posters spam the current trending meme catchphrases to annoy other people.

>>7746983
>they blur
>blur
>they blur
>so you that's why you should look at raw sharp pixels
durrrrr

>>7745725
Even without integer scaling a decent filter will look better than not at all. Sometimes I'll use a filter even without scaling depending on what I'm emulating on; I won't notice the slight misalignment but I will still notice it softening the image into something less harsh.

>>7745804
do you even know what a scanline is?

>the picture filled the full screen!
>it should fill the full screen on any tv!
>it was never meant to be shown with black bars on the sides!
This is what you filter fags sound like. Same for pan-and-scan vs. letterbox bullshit before. Revisionist, imagination land autism. Fuck CRTs and fuck trying to bring back the shittiest aspects of the shittiest CRTs.

>>7750491
Sounds like you're just imagining things to be asspained about. You're spreading your cheeks for ghosts.

>>7745716
Well you scaled the image down wrong, so that's not an accurate representation of the filter. I think CRT filters look great, especially composite ones.

>>7750543
>You're spreading your cheeks for ghosts.
that sounds like fun actually

>>7750543
>Sounds
I didn't post anything with sound. Looks like you're just commenting to see yourself type.

>>7750491
Soft filter = How it looked like
Cartoonish filter = millenial revisionism
No filter sharp pixels = zoomer revisionism, indie faggotry
>Fuck CRTs
Literally the hardware it was supposed to be played on yet you complain about revisionism and autism
Your post works against your argument, pixelfag

>>7750569
You're right, but you did post something asinine and are now pretending you don't understand figurative language. Keep those asscheeks spread; Inky and Clyde want their turns.

>>7750609
>pretending you don't understand figurative language
Never claimed or insinuated any such thing.
You're giving me shit for anecdotal-based hypotheticals AND for clarifying facts. Do you want the most correct facts or do you want emotional rebuttals? You can have both, but then bitching about the presence of either is a bad look.
>you did post something asinine
Bold statement for someone who's posted about buttfucking ghosts twice in the same thread, in /vr/.

>>7745716
nothing wrong with them, I use a CRT as well

>>7750718
and here's a cleaner one if you don't like that amount of blur

>>7745716
I don't use filter because I really don't care. If I wanted to look the same as in CRT, I would just buy those flashcard and play my snes on it.

>>7750597
>supposed to be played on
The ONLY hardware realistically available is not a definitive statement about HAVING to always play on that hardware. Yes, many games were developed and tested with CRTs in mind, but believing that was some kind of preference is purely magical thinking. Making sure something WORKS is rarely the same as outputting the BEST option.
CRTs are shit that everyone abandoned as soon as they could because they knew they were shit. It didn't even matter that early LCDs were shit, they still didn't stink as much as CRTs. And if your CRT had any noticeable effects (lines, blur, etc) then you had a shit CRT.

>>7750691
>You're giving me shit for anecdotal-based hypotheticals AND for clarifying facts.
Anon, please. You're embarrassing.
>Lel you can't hear text!!!!
is not a rebuttal. And your anecdote is worthless, because filters/shaders aren't really analogous to stretching 4:3 to 16:9 and "trying to bring back the shittiest aspects of the shittiest CRTs" doesn't even apply to anything posted in this thread. It's all just preference and none of it matters, and people using CRT shaders shouldn't be triggering to you. What "revisionism" are you referring to? What is your post if not your manufacturing something to screech about?
>posted about buttfucking ghosts
But I did it with a better point than yours.

>>7750741
pure self-serving delusions

>>7750739
>Making sure something WORKS is rarely the same as outputting the BEST option.
Correct. The issue is that pixels alone often do not WORK for certain effects, and are therefore not the BEST if you care about those things. If you don't care about those things and simply want to render the game, then by all means stick to playing on LCD/IPS screens without filters. But as someone that has played on CRTs that WORK I would gladly take a decent shader over not having one regardless of whether it actually approximates everything about a CRT. There are aspects of CRTs I don't want replicated. CRTs aren't homogeneous anyway, and neither are shaders.
>CRTs are shit that everyone abandoned was soon as they could
How old games looked wasn't much of a factor in the move to LCD televisions, I hope you realize.

>>7750286
>with everyone trying the new word they learned
Zoomer filtered to "man of culture" when?

>>7750893
t. triggered zoomer

>>7750909
Sorry mate, I'm 32.

>>7750778
>How old games looked wasn't much of a factor in the move to LCD televisions
What the fuck were you reading that lead you to make this statement?
The rest of your post is just about you sitting too close to the screen and trying to emulate sitting too close to a CRT.

>>7750925
>What the fuck were you reading that lead you to make this statement?
People use CRT shaders because old games look better on CRTs. Old games have nothing to do with the adoption of LCD TVs. Acknowledging that CRTs are the best option for old games doesn't contradict their abandonment. The overall superiority of LCDs for most purposes is as irrelevant as it gets.
>Thecrest of your post is just about you sitting too close to the screen
There it is. That classic dipshittery.

>>7750450
I don't have a problem with softening the image (not my thing personally but I understand it) but I certainly do have a problem using non integer scaling with scanlines or crt filters. Uneven scanlines look absolutely awful.

>>7750491
When you've figured out what you're angry about, be a dear and let the rest of the class know.

>>7750941
>People use CRT shaders because old games look better on CRTs
They're sitting too close to the screen.
>Old games have nothing to do with the adoption of LCD TVs
Again, what does this have to do with what I said? You're replying to nonexistent talking points in order to have an irrelevant high ground.
>The overall superiority of LCDs for most purposes is as irrelevant as it gets
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymoron
>Thecrest
Speaking of dipshittery... you're allowed to copy/paste on here, it's actually encourage when reply greentexting a direct quote.

>>7750942
>Uneven scanlines look absolutely awful.
Depends on the display and shader, really -- especially the display. If I'm using just about any shader on a resolution above 1080 it's mandatory for me, but when I'm playing on a 720p tablet two feet away I won't notice the scanlines being off but I'll still appreciate the shader, even without acknowledging having to adjust for aspect ratio issues that can crop up with integer scaling. There's an argument to be made I guess for just using bilinear filtering in some cases, but I fucking hate bilinear filtering. There's always a compromise somewhere. It's really a case by case basis for me depending on the hardware I'm working with.

>>7751003
Yeah, I went through the same process. In the end I just settled on sharp bilinear for everything and gave up on fancy crt filters. They're nice, but I'd rather just fill the screen. Quilez is also nice if you want some slight softening.

>>7750992
>They're sitting too close to the screen.
You can beLIEve that if you want.
>Again, what does this have to do with what I said?
I was presuming there was some telos to your anti-CRT ramble. But I guess there wasn't.
>Oxymoron
It's not. Something being superior in most instances doesn't mean it is superior in every instance.
>you're allowed to copy/paste on here
>it's actually encourage
Okay.

>>7747832
Turn your 3d render resolution down dude. There are aliased pixels that are intersecting the fake scanlines even. Holy shit. How do zoomers play games like this? Do you have cataracts?

>>7750720
>>7750718
Someone's going to shit on these but they look like a real CRT though I don't get the look it's going for. Pro aperture grille with convergence issues.

>>7751035
maybe there's just something wrong with your eyes

>>7751024
>You can beLIEve that if you want
Your emphasis says otherwise.
>overall superiority
>as irrelevant as it gets
Can't have both. Oxymoron.
The only area in which CRTs maintain superiority is the image distortion one sees when sitting too closely, especially on bad/older models. Some had more distinct lines, some had softer/fuzzier pictures, and some had mixtures of bullshit going on. Look at this thread alone, people debating lines/fuzz/etc like it's some mandela effect bullshit, when in reality people just had different tvs. And they sat too close to the tv when they were a kid, like damn near every kid does (especially when tethered to a controller). Now they're trying to capture childhood nostalgia on different hardware, which they also sit too close to because damn near everyone sits too close to their monitor.

Maybe you, and others here, had a great childhood and want that feeling again. Or whatever. That's great. Pretending CRTs had some ability to improve the image quality of games whose data wouldn't even register as a fart on modern tech is not great. It's delusional, it is enforcing yourself as your own unreliable eyewitness.

>>7751231
>Can't have both.
I can, because we're talking about a specific instance, that instance being older games. LCDs are better at almost everything people use a TV or monitor for, hence overall superiority. But they are not superior for older games. You can disagree with that, but it's not contradictory. The fact you think otherwise makes me wonder if you flunked out of middle school.

This isn't about childhood or nostalgia -- at least far from exclusively. People were making the same argument 20 years ago (though also for reasons that a shader cannot replicate no matter how autistic it is, like refresh rates and input latencies) when CRTs were still too predominate for people to have cultivated selective nostalgia over them. But sure anon, maybe everyone is delusional but you.

>>7750286
>learned. This is just the only one that's stuck for this long,
Roody-poo

Its not just games. I use retroarch to watch 480i anime DVD rips through CRT Royale with interlacing turned on, on my OLED in the living room. Shit looks fantastic, better than any HD streaming service that has the same anime

Seriously, find the original cowboy bebop DVD rips and watch them with CRT shaders. Its surprising how much better they look

>>7751284
>that instance being older games
Older games are not a medium which improves CRTs, nor do CRTs improve older games in any way outside of nostalgia. At least in this reality.
>I can
You can't say something has "overall superiority" then call it irrelevant in the same statement, in the same sentence. Yes, I understand that you're trying to backtrack and say you only meant games, but that's on you. Don't put your fuckups on me.
>This isn't about childhood or nostalgia
It is. It 100% is. Were on a nostalgia board, even if only second hand for some people. This is just another nostalgia-based arguement on a nostalgia-based board.
>People were making the same argument 20 years ago
Are you sure you want the anchor of your argument to be 20 year old LCD tech? Want to try again?

>spending hundreds of dollars on memevms when you could just emulate the aesthetic
lmao @ u

>>7745723
Scanlines are only ever visible if
1. Your tube is very large so the points of light don't fill the voids when they defuse.
2. The screen is old and dimming badly, so since the tube is not being illuminated enough its not filling the gaps in the scans.
3. The gun is out of calibration.
You're not actually suppose to see scan lines, if you do, good chance the thing is going out.
t. former arcade operator/technician. Owned well over 100 CRTs over the years.

>>7751385
you better stop with the truth or you'll scare away all the delusional nostalgia

>>7751412
I can understand for zoomers to not really know how a CRT is suppose to look and get false representation from photos (photos do NOT looks like how a CRT looks IRL unless you do a long exposure), but it baffles me how genX and millennials seemingly have forgot how something looks when they use them for fucking decades.
I've got a few CRT monitors and a good in shape TV still, and I've had people look at them confused that they don't look like their fucking filters. Its like there is this bizarre collective false memory thing going on.

>>7751378
I mean, that looks like a PVM, something no one ever fucking used back then.

>>7751364
>Older games are not a medium which improves CRTs
Correct.
>nor do CRTs improve older games in any way outside of nostalgia
Incorrect.
>At least in this reality
Uh huh.
>backtrack
There was no backtracking you dullard. Use context clues. It was my whole point when I said old games were irrelevant to the move to LCDs, which is why the myriad things LCDs do better are not relevant. If basic inference is beyond you I would advise remedial schooling.
>It is. It 100% is. Were on a nostalgia board
People play older games for reasons other than nostalgia. Is this your problem? You think people only engage with older media out of nostalgia?
>20 year old LCD tech?
You're the dum-dum that suggested LCDs were overwhelmingly superior right out the gate. So it shouldn't matter. But the reality is those aesthetic things still stand vis-a-vis the LCD. It has to do with how the games were made more than limitations of the LCD (response times and so on are a different story), but it nevertheless means the LCD doesn't deliver things a CRT can. I almost exclusively use an LCD of some kind these days out of convenience (hence shaders), but I use shaders because of those differences. Nothing wrong with preferring not to use them, but insisting anyone that prefers the look of a CRT -- be it real or some aspects replicated -- for old games is delusional just makes you seem like an idiot. It's true you cannot make out every scanline from a normal distance (or any at all, more like, though some TVs have more prominent ones than others you still won't notice outright), but that's also true for a shader unless you've created something truly unholy. You don't need to be a Trinitron autist or someone breaking into a news station's storage to raid their dusty PVM stock to understand any of this. And this all neglects that, for me anyway, replicating a CRT in itself isn't the point which is why I don't care about accuracy to any given CRT. But the differences with CRTs still exist.

>>7751524
>You think people only engage with older media out of nostalgia?
How does nostalgia works when you play games you never played before?

>>7746983
>since they're interlaced

>>7751385
Are you dumb? If you sit as close to a CRT as people at their desks using crt shaders sit to their monitors, depending on the TVL of the set you would definitely see scanlines. I have a 14" consumer trinitron and if I set 2 feet away from it (aka at my desk), yes, there are very visible scanlines. A lower 250-300 tvl would have them more obfuscated, but I bet you'd still see them at that distance

My point being, I use CRT shaders on my 65" 4k oled in my living room, while sitting about 9'~ away on my couch. Using CRT Royale, at that size and distance, no, I dont make out scanlines. And after messing the appropriate blur and glow settings, it not only looks better than raw pixels IMO, but does largely match what my upper end consumer sets look like (with RGB amyway).

>>7751524
You're just ranting at this point. Having arguments with yourself over nonexistent references. Each of your posts refutes the last and delves further into obscenity. At best, I believe you'll randomly nitpick until you have enough points to make yourself feel technically correct. As if arguments and their sides have a physical weight, and the scales need to tip in your favor. Seek professional help.

>>7751321
These days it's impossible to know if this is satire or not.

>>7751593
It is not. I 100% mean it

>>7751589
Your lack of reading comprehension is astounding. I just know stupid when I see it.

>>7751605
Then I applaud your dedication and hope your DVDs.

>>7751636
*Enjoy your DVDs

>>7751424
Most tvs were shit/old, they were too close to the screen, they have distinct memories of features/errors which produced these effects (ff/rew, pics of tvs, cartoon tvs that exaggerated the effects, etc), poor signal quality, parents with zero tech expertise.
They're not 100% wrong, just mostly wrong. Aberrations solidify in most people's brains more easily than the norm. Think of PTSD. A minor (in terms of time) event can become an overwhelming focal point. And memories are drawn from the last time we remembered something, not the "source" memory. So people that think "lines," or whatever, when they think about CRTs might have actually experienced lines very little. Or not at all, maybe they saw a screencap of a lined filter labeled "CRT" so their brain just filed it as such. Shit's fucked.

>>7751667
but I have an actual consumer crt right now, sitting on my desk, right next to my pc monitor, and after some fiddling I can get crt royale shaders to look pretty much identical. So I'm not sure how that plays into false memories

>>7751674
You're right, your ability to alter a specific program on one specific piece of hardware to mimic the operation of an older piece of specific hardware probably has nothing to do with false memories. If you said "ALL tvs looked like this one," yeah, then we're in different territory.

For clarity's sake, "false memories" is a bit of a misnomer in the situation I was trying to convey. These things (lines, etc) did exist on occasion but not to the degree or frequency often remembered. It's a more casual way of the average brain saying "fuck it, ain't got the room and ain't getting paid enough for this shit," where false memories lean harder toward psychosis. Casually? "False memories" is fine. Just trying to differentiate between normal and crazy.

>>7751738
>"ALL tvs looked like this one,"
Does anybody really think this, though? The sheer multitude of preset CRT shaders alone would suggest otherwise. Shaders are just as different from each other as real CRTs are from each other, and often have more margins to customize on than many actual CRTs ever did.

I'm not arguing with the gist of your thesis, but I think "critics" understate the variety and overstate how little people remember CRTs. Though I personally don't think it matters either way unless there's a very specific look you want to imitate.

>>7751762
I was trying to say "all crts" more in reference to the near-magical quality of CRTs that's bestowed by proponents of CRTs in nearly every thread. That's still not quite what I'm going for but tired.

There are a lot of CRT shaders because people reference different CRTs, people remember things differently, and production of shaders is relatively easy. There are as many wrong answers in this topic as there are correct ones.

I'm more concerned with the argument that CRTs have an advantageous position over LCDs. Outside of nostalgia I don't believe they do. Yes, viewing preference is up to the individual user. I'll defend anyone's right to look at garbage. But that viewing typically erupts into public outcries of "best/worst," inaccurate statements as fact, and an overabundance of negatively expressed magical thinking. Dumb shit. Dumb shit because a lot of people heavily invested in childhood nostalgia have immature emotional expression.

I wonder what you faggots will do when the last CRT breaks and no one has any parts left to fix it. Drop retro games forever?

>>7751035
>Pro aperture grille with convergence issues
That’s adjustable in the shader parameters

>>7751863
>Outside of nostalgia I don't believe they do.
Older games often had their visuals tailored around basic things intrinsic to CRTs. Not because they were thinking "Boy, I really like this CRT more than the OLED TV I don't know will exist!" but because that's just what was around and they learned how to exploit its qualities to certain ends they wanted, like exploiting color bleed or artifacts from color alteration, or how a general blur applies to dithering. To think otherwise (or to think all of that stuff was unintentional which is a sentiment I see surprisingly often) is like suggesting Michelangelo didn't know how to manipulate plaster because frescos fell out of popularity after the Renaissance. None of that has anything to do with nostalgia, and it isn't magical. It's just a fact.

Even some basic CRT shaders at modest resolutions can handle a lot of that even if they don't reproduce everything unique about CRTs. But you can get pretty fucking close if you have a high resolution and the processing power for it, as >>7751558 notes. The more real estate you have the more you can replicate.

>>7751035
CRT Royale has convergence settings. Can control the X and Y positions of all three colors independently. I personally do a 20, 0, -20 offset

>>7752183
You're really stretching the reality of the design and development effort that went into video games in relation to CRTs.

>>7750315
>''based''

Right there, the WORDFILTER. >>7750281

>>7745716

>>7748165
>I remember when this board was good
Dude Mario 3 is better than World ha ha. Also All Stars is soulless...now let me tell you about Sega Shiturn.

>>7752229
Nope.

>>7752203
it's not CRT Royale though

>>7748246
crt royale

>>7752445
Oh, sorry, misread. I thought he was wanting a shader to replicate convergence issues

>>7750386
What do you think a bilinear filter does?

>>7751538
Yeah I take that back. Maybe the reason people saw it differently had more to do with if you were European or American like >>7747018 said. Maybe the 20% higher vertical resolution for PAL TVs made the scanlines less visible.

>>7747018
what are you talking about 288p still had visible scanlines, you must've only ever played at the full 576i

>>7750480
he's actually right scanlines do move as that is there purpose
but he probably means the blank lines move which they definitely do not

>>7753023
a scanline is a single row of pixels, it doesn't move, what moves is the electron beam

Why is there so much autistic shit flinging about this? Just play however you like.

>>7753456
A scan line is what the gun does anon, it scans a line of light

>>7753476
I'm not going to discuss this, have a good day

>>7753483
That’s ok anon, you can let the video show you what it does
https://youtu.be/3BJU2drrtCM @2:30

>Ah, sharp pixels
>Yes, this is what it's supposed to look like

So this is the power of CRT-Loppez huh

>>7745790
>>7746380
answer me you stupid fucking faggot

>>7755731
Not him, but I believe it's some sort of CRT filter. Hope this helps.

>>7745716
Pixelated games don't need it unless you want that extra color or to quench your nostalgia.
Early 3D and prerendered game are a surefire yes
I'm done

>>7755750
I will pay you $15 USD right now if you tell me the name

>>7745716
>dull whites
>uneven scanlines that don't vary in intensity depending on how bright the color is
>no halation
>no color bleed
>no mask emulation
It's just bilinear with shitty scanlines. It's a bad example and you're a faggot.

>>7745718
>>7751385
How are you this much of an unobservant retard to think bilinear is even close to how things look on CRTs, let alone arcade monitors? Congratulations, you learned and observed fucking nothing with all your experience. A straight black line using bilinear filtering looks like it was drawn with a sharpie with rounded edges and is nothing like how a CRT does it you dullard dope.

>>7750691
Cringe.

>>7756329
Looks like crt-geom with hsm-bezel-reflection.

>>7753476
Old TVs were 480p. But old games were 240p and would only fit half the screen if they were displayed all together.

So the console would actually SKIP every other line. Just leave that line of pixels blank. This makes the 240p image fill the entire TV screen. But gives it a scanline look as every other line is blank.

It's funny because they're actually Skip lines not scanlines.

>>7753014
My mega drive was 576 interlaced? I dunno. I don't ever remember scanlines on TVs. Ever. But I could be misremembering it was so long ago.

>>7757528
maybe you only ever used RF signal

>>7756361
What shader do you use, fag?
>inb4 i play on actual crt
No you don't. You wouldn't be reading a thread like this if you did.

>>7757575
Was that the one that plugs into the aerial antenna? Cus yeah I used that. What does that do?

>>7745716
That is a poor example of filtering/shaders.
The best shaders look very good and are a great approximation of a variety of display types and signals. For many games these effects are necessary if you want to play games in a flattering manner on a modern LCD display. They can also be used with CRT, Plasma, and OLED to great effect. You can use a CRT shader on another CRT to great effect.

The biggest downside to shader usage is loss of brightness, which can be mitigated by use of a high nit display. Or playing games in a darkened room and allowing your eye to adjust to the lowered brightness.
Response time and contrast levels need to be good on the source display in order for CRT shaders to be flattering to moving images. But even on a low response time LCD I would rather have shaders activated than not.

Shaders should tweaked for the individual user's display.

How do I properly blend dithering on PS1 games?

>>7758495
1. What is your set-up
2. How much trouble do you want to go to from 1 to 5

>>7758516
I already set up CRT Royale. All I'm really missing is proper blending for the dither. Can't wrap my head around GTUv5 since it just blurs the shit out of everything.

>>7758534
Have you tried CRT-Royale + TV Out + Image Adjustments?

>>7747832
That's fucking eye cancer right there. Why would you do this to yourself?

>>7745716
How fucking big does your throat have to be that you drink onions like they're the little spheres in boba tea?

>>7758561
My options are limited. This is the questionable situation I'm trying to fix. Native res, unfiltered, +CRTR, +NTSC simulation.

>>7758817
CRT Royale + NTSC simulation looks the best.
You'll still see some dithering even with a proper set-up.

>>7758961
I should add that this NTSC simulation shader simulates a shitty NTSC cable, hence why it looks a bit washed out. It's the best I could find since GTUv5 does jack shit unless I want everything to be blurry.

>>7758817
Shake it baby

Managed to unfuck GTU, but got multiple results.

>>7759286
That looks more like a low res LCD than a CRT

>>7745716
CRT filters are bullshit.

Unless your rig is capable of rendering and displaying 3600 frames per second, you'll never have accurate scanline emulation.

>>7759468
autism

>>7759468
>unless it works exactly like a CRT it's not a CRT
you're not very smart are you, the objective is to make it look better than just naked pixels, these >>7750718
>>7750720
are good

>>7745716
I mainly emulate close to my computer so I use the lighter shaders. Seems like you need to be a decent distance away from your monitor to fully appreciate stuff like Royale

>>7745716
...do you not use sautéed onions in eggs, rice, beef, green beans, and soups? WTF kind of spice hell is that?

>>7745716

>>7759561
What's that? I kind of like that.

>>7759361
Well I spent hours on tweaking it but I still wouldn't know.

>>7760257
Best to use one from the presets folder and alter the parameters, however if you’re only on 1080p don’t expect amazing results
Try crt guest dr venom

I am going to continue to use shaders and have fun.

There is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

>>7745930
Why?

>>7757251
fucking awesome, I don't know how to layer shaders on top of each other but it's good enough. Dunno how to pay you though, would've been a within-5-minutes-of-you-posting kind of transaction

>>7745716
I'm using crt-pi right now.

>>7748165
What else is there to talk about?

>>7745716
Yeah why the fuck would anyone think a diaper wearing baby with his legs spread out like a retard would good

>>7756379
It's not that bilinear makes it look like a CRT, it's that it makes it look the best period.

>>7745716
That screenshot unironically looks better than raw pixels and pure bilinear

>>7749936
Zoomer here
>No cap
No lie (cap means lie)
>Ion
I don't

>>7760509
Bilinear just blurs the image a bit to prevent shimmering and uneven pixels

>>7745716
>onions
Don't throw sudo science sauce on your PC, brah.

>>7760449
Well I'd tell you how to layer them but you owe me $15.

>>7749936
>iono
>i don't know

>>7760612
iono y wypipo finna be wastin they time talkin bout filters fo a lil kid's gaym
I feel bad for these niggas no cap

>>7747867
pixelshit vs blurryshit, same difference really

>>7760624
Finna doesn't really work there

Which one looks better to you niggas?

>>7760661
Neither. You're not integer scaling, are you?

>>7760537
thanks, fellow zoomer
maybe if you faggots didnt have such retarded slang i wouldn't feel second-hand embarrassment from being assigned to the same arbitrary cultural generation as you
seriously, what the fuck is even going on, did you guys just straight up adopt AAVE?
>>7760624
exhibit A; that fits perfectly

>>7760663
I don't know what that is or how to do it

>>7760668
It's really the white kids that make the slang sound so fucking bad honestly. Black people at least know how and when to use those words, white kids just imitate them to fit in.

>>7760675
You see the banding in the areas of solid colour? Or that some of the scanlines are bigger and brighter than others? It's because the fake pixels are different sizes. Go to settings, video, scaling, and turn integer scaling on. That will make all the pixels the same size, at the expense of the image not fully filling the screen.

>>7760449
>hsm-bezel-reflection
Where did you get this overlay and effect? How do you implement it?

>>7760732
Don't use it myself, but there's some threads on the libretro forum. Like this: https://forums.libretro.com/t/hsm-mega-bezel-reflection-shader-feedback-and-updates/25512

>>7751974
There are TVs from the 50s that still work. I'll be fine.

>>7747867
I never really took a good look at this sprite. For some reason I always saw the sword as one long arm that was holding the shield like a stick.

>>7761062
that's not an uncommon thing

>>7759551
Yeah, I noticed that too. You need to be distant enough for everything to blend.

You faggots sure love to show your little screenshots without saucing the shaders and effects

>>7760675
Integer scaling is just scaling the image by a multiple (or integer) of the native resolution. Example 320x240 scaled to a 3x integer would be 960x720. Keeps all the pixels square and is necessary for CRT scanline filters to line up, otherwise you end up with rainbow banding like you have in your screenshots.

>>7760702
>>7762217
I don't notice any banding but I fixed it thanks anons. It does look better now. Too lazy to retake screenshots

>>7762220
As long as you enjoy it that's the main thing.

>>7749936
Cap means lie and ion is "I don't" minus the space, the D, the apostrophe, and the T. It took me a while to figure this shit out myself even as a zoomer. I don't know where my friends pick up half this retarded slang.

>>7762243
>Cap means lie
Fucking how?

>>7762215
Just ask for it. Some shader presets have tons of options and sometimes people will change the passes and parameters accordingly to their personal preference.
I'm a brainlet when it comes to shaders so I just use xm29plus with halation, diffusion and interlacing turned off and depending on the game I change the mask and gamma.

>>7760680
so are most zoomers wiggers? i mean, i guess i assumed with how popular lil [insert noun/adjective here] is

>>7762243
am i even a zoomer at 23? i feel estranged from people my own age, but its much worse with anyone even just a little younger than me

>>7762314
You were born last century, so you're a millennial. I'm so, so sorry.

>>7762323
lol, well at least i wont confuse myself with you underlings anymore

>>7762326
Don't pity me, I'm an older millennial. No, wait, maybe you should pity me. Whatever.

>>7760443
He wants to raw dog it

>>7762314
>23
Full Zoomer

>>7762807
Not true, 2000 is the absolute cutoff.

>>7762848
1995 is the established cutoff everywhere except on 4chan (the place where millennials are called "boomers")

>>7762848
nonsense

>>7762938
Complete nonsense, somebody born in 1996 is not a zoomer, they were out of college when Fortnite was released, nobody thinks of them when they say zoomer.

>>7762960
>1996
Older Zoomer. The turn of the Millennium was meaningless for them if they can even dimly remember it.

Zoomers are not just little kids and teenagers. Many of them have already graduated college.

>>7762989
>if they can even dimly remember it.
lol, i was born in 97 and i remember new years 2000 just fine, albeit because it was hyped to shit.
i also watched 9/11 unfold live so if thats a qualification for you too i meet it

>>7763008
>>7762938
I was born in 1999 and I don't give a fuck about meaningless autistic labels. The gaps are way too large to be productive classification

>>7763056
i agree, but im just curious if there's an actual consensus or not, since ive never bothered to figure that out

>>7763058
I think its safe to say that as time goes on, in say 100 years zoomers will be seen as starting at 2000, as most look back since its easier to remember. Only people who give a fuck are people who were born around that time.

>>7760732
I just use a preset, it's a pain in the ass because most of the presets don't work, but luckily this one did. Make sure to have vulcan or the other one, i think opengl

>>7763074
They won't because one of the core concepts of being a Millennial is coming of age around the year 2000. That means being somewhere in your teenage years, or at most slightly above or below.

If you were in diapers in the year 1999 you are a Zoomer, whether you can "remember" NYE 2000 or not.

>>7762938
>>7762960
>>7762989
>>7763056
>>7763008
I was born in 96 and people from my generation are pretty zoomerish. The only reason I myself aren't that much of a zoomer is because I grew up in a third world country where technology is always 5 years behind and also because I'm a huge autist who's not into what other people my age are into. Everybody I know who's my age and a normalfag uses Instagram. But then again I know some 50 yo people who also do use it.

>>7747867
>>7750720
close but it still doesn't look like a real crt
This is how that shot looks on a nes through composite plugged into a s-vcr to my trinitron

>>7762960
>>7762848
1996 - 2007 is Z gen

>>7763484
>filter looks better
Do I have terminal zoom zoom?

>>7747867

I made this now infamous image. My tv had a LOT of dust on it which made the image way fuzzier.

how the fuck is this thread still going

>>7763484
I can add the composite dot crawl but I just prefer it to look a bit cleaner

>>7752292
Those memes are post rule change

>>7762307
Yes, white people are still the majority of the US population after all.

N64, 2x internal upscale, downscaled back to native 240p output, through a crt shader with the native N64 bilinear and dither filtering turned off

Personally I think this is the best N64 can look, and the native 240p output fixes a lot of wonky UI/HUD issues N64 games tend to have when emulated. But to each their own

>>7764364
bloom too harsh

>>7747181
>63KB
Stop saving garbage on your pc.

>>7764525

>>7760509
The fuck it does. Play Mega Man and look at the health bar. Tell me that shit looks good with the white blurring into the black between lines.

>>7764565

>>7764671

>>7764671
Step-up your game anon.