/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.3061651]

Post the technically best-looking PS1 games!
No 240p games allowed!

[Anonymous No.3061654]

*compulsory Vagrant Story post*

[Anonymous No.3061658]

>>3061654
what resolution is it?

[Anonymous No.3061667]

>>3061651
Tobal isn't a full 480i anyway

[Anonymous No.3061669]

>>3061651
Vagrant Story

[Anonymous No.3061681]

>>3061667
It's 512x448i. I don't know what you mean. But whatever makes you sleep at night. Besides this is tobal 2.

[Anonymous No.3061682]

I don't understand why you would want to emulate interlacing artifiacts, it's more cpu intensive than just doing progressive scan.

[Anonymous No.3061685]

Internal Section I think is the only game at full 480i 60fps.

[Anonymous No.3061694]

>>3061685
PAL region get all the good games to trip acid too

[Anonymous No.3061698]

>>3061682
because this is not how the games look. 448/480i becomes 30 full images out of 60 half fields on a CRT while retaining the full resolution.
The deinterlacing in emulation is very bare bone and halfs the resolution, so you get 224/240p which does not correspond to the real thing. You can mimic it with ghosting but it's not the same. To truly capture the full resolution and how it looks in motion you have to turn of deinterlacing because not all frames are interlaced some are just combed like you can see in the image, but emulators only have bare bone deinterlacing, they can't decomb, so resolution is lost unnecessarily.

[Anonymous No.3061710]

>>3061682
>>3061698
>>3061651
480i looks like trash regardless on games.

[Anonymous No.3061714]

>>3061698
I know that, but interlaced looks like shit and emulators can have infinitely larger resolution than the ps1 could handle anyway.

[Anonymous No.3061717]

>>3061710
>>3061714
Maybe you should play on a CRT and not a HDTV to learn to appreciate the wonders of high resolution and interlacing.

PS1 upscaling is shit by the way. I prefer a real console and a CRT.

[Anonymous No.3061728]

>>3061717
Looks like shit regardless. But on a progressive display it's especially horrible with the deinterlacing.

You get flicker and combing everywhere which makes fast gameplay terrible looking.

If you love this trash so much why not play on the PS2? That system has 480i games with blur filters as far as the eye can see.

[Anonymous No.3061738]

>>3061728
ps2 is not retro. i don't understand what your problem is? you sound like you have a personal vendetta against interlacing? lol. don't let it out on me.

[Anonymous No.3061741]

>>3061738
What? It's a trash resolution to try to play games with. Nothing more.

[Anonymous No.3061742]

Silent Hill menu also looks very hq-ish. It's actually 320x448i. A weird resolution

[Anonymous No.3061746]

>>3061741
okay cool. can we go now back on topic again pls?

[Anonymous No.3061752]

>>3061746
Your topic is on the level of someone saying composite is better than rgb.

Expect it.

[Anonymous No.3061763]

map screen also 320x448i

[Anonymous No.3061772]

>>3061752
That's why I said technically. Resolution-wise. Most High-res images. Besides the topic is debatable. In my country they couldn't decide if to use 720p or 1080i. It's debatable. Unlike composite and rgb. 720p and 1080i; both are flawed - only 1080p is superior. Same with 240p and 480i, only 480p is the winner. But if it pleases your autistic heart we can redefining the OP to "Post the technically best-looking PS1 games resolution-wise. Only 448i and 480i games allowed. No 240p games allowed."

[Anonymous No.3061778]

>>3061772
What are you talking about?

For video games it's progressive are trash.

You say you're 3rd world so I don't know what fuckbackwards thinking you're on about. Giving me another reason to add to why 3rd worlders should just be banned off 4chan and the internet in general.

There's very expensive equipment just to get rid of interlace trash and attempt to make it progressive without losing quality.

[NESfag No.3061779]

>>3061763
Ah yes, I loved that map. The way written stuff gets added on top of it the more you explore, really cool idea.

[Anonymous No.3061781]

>>3061763
>>3061742
Interesting, I never knew that. I remember thinking that the models in the menu were really good, but I really loved Silent Hill's graphics in general.

[Anonymous No.3061783]

>>3061651
>240p games allowed!
>>>/v/

[Anonymous No.3061784]

>>3061778
>>3061783
Sorry this is not the place to discuss your personal vendetta with interlacing. feel free to make a thread about the disadvantages of interlacing and the advantages of progressive scan. i would happily join the conversion. but this thread is about posting images of technically best-looking (most high-res) ps1. please contribute to the thread with images. thank you.

>>3061779
i love it, too.

[Anonymous No.3061793]

>>3061651
>>3061784
They aren't the best looking by any standard but your "shit in the streets" one.


I've read some stupid shit on /vr/ but man. Some 3rd worlder idiot actually saying 480i is superior to 240p?
If you're baiting good job. I ate that shit up.

[Anonymous No.3061795]

>>3061793
No one said that. Learn to read.
>I ate that shit up.
You made that shit up in your head. You created the drama yourself.

Thread is about posting best looking PS1 games resolution-wise. The high-res PS1 games have a resolution of 448i or 480i. You got that? Please be less angry.

[Anonymous No.3061798]

>>3061795
>Post the technically best-looking PS1 games
>No 240p games allowed!

Fuck off retard.

[Anonymous No.3061806]

>>3061798
Oh boy go cry in the corner. I can feel your over peevishness half the globe. Don't act like a angry 6 year old. Walk away if you don't like.

[Anonymous No.3061807]

>>3061806
You could make quality threads. Oh but fuck that.

[Anonymous No.3061814]

>>3061807
>mama he said he said no 240p allowed
>mama what should i do

[Anonymous No.3061816]

>>3061814
Dank reaction image. Great thread.

[Anonymous No.3061906]

>>3061778
do you have autism

[Anonymous No.3061910]

>>3061906
>>3061793
nvm you're just a /jp/sie

[Anonymous No.3061917]

>>3061651

[Anonymous No.3061927]

Wipeout 3 was hi-res and looked great.

[Anonymous No.3062049]

I hope you learned OP that resolution isn't everything. The best looking PS1 games are 240p and look brilliant texturewise. Games like Gran Turismo 2.

[Anonymous No.3062583]

>>3061917
>>3062049
That's 224/240p. Sorry.
Only 448/480i games allowed in this thread.

[Anonymous No.3062587]

>>3061651
>No 240p games allowed!
>implying interlacing isn't shit

[Anonymous No.3062590]

>>3062587
Sorry. Only technically most high-res allowed. Only 448/480i games allowed in this thread.

[Anonymous No.3062594]

>>3061927
Sorry. Wipe Out 3 is in low resolution mode 240p.
We are looking for games with a high resolution mode.

[Anonymous No.3062606]

>>3062590
You asked for "best-looking" not "most high-res".

[Anonymous No.3062607]

Tekken 3 is gorgeous in 512x448i.

[Anonymous No.3062612]

>>3062606
I asked for the technically best-looking , from a technological standpoint e.g. the ones with the highest resolution. Besides you could've read the thread, I already corrected myself.

[Anonymous No.3062613]

>>3062607
384x448i

[Anonymous No.3062628]

>>3062613
Correct. I agree. Besides >>3062607 that image is wrong, aspect ratio is messed up. It should look like this.

[Anonymous No.3062636]

>>3062612
>technically best-looking , from a technological standpoint e.g. the ones with the highest resolution

That's your own subjective interpretation. The PS1's BIOS is 448i, does that make it technologically better looking than full fledged 240p games with tons of texture mapped tris and not a hint of fog/mipmapping (MGS1) or games with brilliant lighting (SH), or games with millions of polygons per level (any Crash Bandicoot).

Look at pic related and tell me it's not technically advanced.

[Anonymous No.3062639]

>>3061685
It's literally impossible to have 480i 60fps. Read up on the NTSC standard before you talk about it.

[Anonymous No.3062651]

>>3062639
Uh, no? It just means there are two 240p fields which get constantly updated instead of complementing the previous/next field.

[Anonymous No.3062653]

>>3062636
Stop nit-picking. I formulated it wrong. This thread is for the best-looking high-resolution mode game. You got that?

>>3062639
I agree. But I think anon means it's the only game running in 640x448/480i mode.

https://youtu.be/amsXXHgxQwk

[Anonymous No.3062656]

>>3062651
That's 30fps dude.
60i = 30fps.

[Anonymous No.3062671]

>>3062656
That's 30fps dude.

That's not 30 frames per second because there was no frame to begin with, only fields.

60i = 60 fields update per second, which is basically the same as 240p, but switching between odd/even rows. There's no reason a 480i game can't run at 60fps. Since on the screen there are only ever 240 lines anyway so your eye perceives the motion as intended. If a 60i was locked at 30fps, now that would be 30 full frames per second.

[Anonymous No.3062673]

>>3062656
>That's 30fps dude.

That's not 30 frames per second because there was no frame to begin with, only fields.

60i = 60 fields update per second, which is basically the same as 240p, but switching between odd/even rows. There's no reason a 480i game can't run at 60fps. Since on the screen there are only ever 240 lines anyway so your eye perceives the motion as intended. If a 60i was locked at 30fps, now that would be 30 full frames per second.

[Anonymous No.3062674]

>>3062656
Except it has a 60 samples per second temporal resolution, so we should ignore the TV industry's fucked up terminology and call it "60fps interlaced" to distinguish it from "30fps interlaced" where each pair of fields samples a single point in time.

[Anonymous No.3062680]

>>3062612
...no you didnt. you said technically best looking. thats NOT specifically highest resolution

[Anonymous No.3062683]

>>3062680
I corrected myself. Too bad you are ignoring it, because your autism is over 99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999.

[Anonymous No.3062695]

>>3062653
>it's the only game running in 640x448/480i mode.

GT1 Hi-Fi.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rdAxewJ6fw

[Anonymous No.3062696]

>>3062673
That doesn't make any sense. Please explain. I want to understand your viewpoint.
>Since on the screen there are only ever 240 lines anyway
>60 fields update per second
That means you need 2 field updates for full 480lines (60:2=30 full fields) which is equivalent to 30fps progressive.

[Anonymous No.3062705]

>>3061927
>>3062594
So it Wipeout 3 240p or 480i? I don't know. I'm confused. I only judged by the screenshot. maybe it wrong. Can someone check?

[Anonymous No.3062707]

>>3062695
Cool! Do you know any more games in 640x480i mode?
Gran Turismo looks really beautiful.

[Anonymous No.3062717]

>>3062683
then your no longer really looking for the best looking games anymore if resolution is the only criteria. anyone could slap together some homebrew that renders a single polygon at 1920x1080. guess THATS the best looking one, amirite

[Anonymous No.3062719]

>>3062695
>>3062707
I kek'd at the city lights tho.

[Anonymous No.3062726]

>>3062717
Post best-looking PS1 games with a high-resolution 448/480i mode or leave. If you want to debate the advantages of higher resolution, feel free to make a new thread. This is not the place for it. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.3062732]

>>3062696
>which is equivalent to 30fps progressive
No, because the fields are not halves of a single frame, they are completely independent samples. You get disgusting combing artifacts and flicker, but at least you get the full temporal resolution.

[Anonymous No.3062737]

>>3062696
>That means you need 2 field updates for full 480lines

You never see the whole 480 lines together, it's all in your head. What I mean is that the second field update (let's say the even row) doesn't have to reference the previous odd row, so when put together you see interlacing artifacts because they come from different logical renderings.

Since as I mentioned, you're only allowed to see 240 lines at once on a CRT, the motion is not lost on 480x60i because your eye syncs on every update creating a fast, smooth illusion of high resolution.

>>3062705
Wipeout 3 is 512x240 so it's high resolution, but horizontally, which is still great imo.

[Anonymous No.3062741]

>>3062732
>No
That's not physically possible from a technical standpoint. If you only have 60 fields PER SECOND , the effective frame rate can't be higher than 30fps, because there is no information for 60fps. You would need 120i for 60fps interlaced content.

[Anonymous No.3062753]

>>3062737
>What I mean is that the second field update (let's say the even row) doesn't have to reference the previous odd row, so when put together you see interlacing artifacts because they come from different logical renderings.
>your eye syncs on every update creating a fast, smooth illusion of high resolution
That's not 60fps. That's not real 60fps. That's just pseudo HFR smooth motion. It's basically like HDTV backstrobing.
In 60i there is not enough information for 60fps, the effective resolution is 30fps. What you desribe as smooth illusion is in fact just the illusion of the strobing effect and not REAL 60fps, it's effectively 30fps.

[Anonymous No.3062794]

>>3062741
Of course it's technically possible. It's exactly the same as 240p except jittering up or down slightly every field. It's basically a shitty kind of temporal dithering, increasing spatial resolution at the expense of motion artifacts. There is genuine 60fps motion information.

>>3062753
>It's basically like HDTV backstrobing
It's nothing like that. It's completely independent of image persistence.

[Anonymous No.3062848]

>>3062707
Ridge Racer 4 included a remake of the first Ridge Racer game in 640x480 running at 60 FPS.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8zN3upT2QM

[Anonymous No.3062851]

>>3061741
How old are you^

[Anonymous No.3062864]

>>3062794
Learn math.
By your logic real 60fps are perceived as 120fps. because the eye
> syncs on every update creating a fast, smooth illusion of high resolution

[Anonymous No.3062868]

>>3062794
It's technically impossible. You said it yourself. LOLOLOL.

[Anonymous No.3062887]

>>3062753
Pic related is how a CRT displays interlaced content, more or less. Now, this is a static image, so each field will always reference the same time frame, is it so strange that each set of rows might come from a DIFFERENT time frame, as in EACH FIELD IS INDEPENDENTLY UPDATED? You don't have to think of 480i as 480p@30, but 240p*2@60. Each own field updates at 30fps, but you get two 240p pics spaced throughout a 480p area with 60 updates per second.

[Anonymous No.3062953]

>>3062887
>but 240p*2@60. Each own field updates at 30fps
That's not how physics work. >Each field updates @30fps. Wrong. Each field updates @60fps.

For an image to be 60fps it has to be updated every 1/60 second, while interlacing only updates every half field every 1/60 second, so you get full information processed only every 1/30 second. There is not enough information for full 60fps.
60p= 1/60 second: frame one - 2/60 second: frame two
60i= 1/60 second: frame one upper half - 2/60 second: frame one lower half - 3/60 second: frame two upper half - 4/60 second: frame two lower half

While 60i takes 4/60 seconds to process two frames, 60p has already processed 4 frames.
Did you fail high school or something?

[Anonymous No.3062974]

>>3062887
>but 240p*2@60. Each own field updates at 30fps
That's not how physics work. >Each field updates @30fps. Correct. >but 240p*2@60. That is illogical. That doesn't make it 60fps.

For an image to be 60fps it has to be updated every 1/60 second, while interlacing only updates every half field every 1/60 second, so you get full information processed only every 1/30 second. There is not enough information for full 60fps.
60p= 1/60 second: frame one - 2/60 second: frame two
60i= 1/60 second: frame one upper half - 2/60 second: frame one lower half - 3/60 second: frame two upper half - 4/60 second: frame two lower half

While 60i takes 4/60 seconds to process two frames, 60p has already processed 4 frames, so 60i can't technically ever be 60fps per second.
Did you fail high school or something?

[Anonymous No.3062984]

>>3062974
>There is not enough information for full 60fps
There is enough information for 60 motion samples per second. This is commonly known as "60fps", unless you are a shitposter or a TV industry worker. And the TV industry is responsible for inflicting interlacing on us in the first place, so fuck those guys.

[Anonymous No.3063021]

>>3062953
>Each field updates @60fps

Nigga one field is fucking BLANK when the other is drawing, the only updating it's doing is not being hit by the electron gun, which happens every 1/30 second. This means your eye is only going to get each 240p pic and enver the whole picture, so what's wrong with sending 60 240p pics per second in different areas?

>>3062984
You'd seriously rather watch 240p television?

[Anonymous No.3063030]

>>3062887
Added to my /vr/ folder

[Anonymous No.3063041]

>>3062887
>>3062984
>>3063021

>but 240p*2@60. Each own field updates at 30fps
That's not how physics work.
>Each field updates @30fps.
Fields updated alternating @60fps. That means 1/60 of a second. If fields updated alternating at 1/30 of a second we would have 15fps. Each half field of course is only updated @30fps. I guess that is what you are saying. But that even more proves what I'm trying to explain to you.

>but 240p*2@60.
That is illogical. That doesn't make it 60fps.

Explanation:
For an image to be 60fps it has to be updated every 1/60 second, while interlacing only updates each half field alternating @1/60 second, so you get full information processed every 1/60 second, only partial information, thus it is not real 60fps. There is not enough information for full 60fps.
60p= 1/60 second: frame one - 2/60 second: frame two
60i= 1/60 second: frame one upper half - 2/60 second: frame one lower half - 3/60 second: frame two upper half - 4/60 second: frame two lower half

While 60i takes 4/60 seconds to process two frames, 60p has already processed 4 frames, so 60i can't technically ever be 60fps per second. You are talking about partial resolution, but this is not real 60fps, because by physics 60i can't process 60 frames per second, only partial information and resolution.

Did you fail high school or something?

[Anonymous No.3063045]

>>3063041
*so you get not full information processed every 1/60 second

[Anonymous No.3063049]

>>3063041
FIELDS
DO
NOT
DISPLAY
AT
THE
SAME
TIME

[Anonymous No.3063053]

>>3063021
>Nigga one field is fucking BLANK when the other is drawing
All the objects I'm viewing a more than a single pixel tall so I still get the full temporal resolution.

>You'd seriously rather watch 240p television?
Yes. 240p > 480i. Interlacing artifacts are much more annoying than low resolution. Also high quality upscaling is much easier than high quality deinterlacing.

>>3063041
>only partial information, thus it is not real 60fps
Only true if the moving object is only 1 pixel high.

[Anonymous No.3063057]

>>3063049
Exactly. Can you read?
Or did you also fail elementary school?
>Fields are updated alternating @60fps
>Each half field is only updated @30fps

[Anonymous No.3063065]

>>3061917
Why did I watch this

[Anonymous No.3063080]

>>3063053
>Only true if the moving object is only 1 pixel high.
60i is still not real 60fps. Real 60fps is updated @1/60 second at full resolution. In 60i each field is updated alternating @1/60 second while each field to it's own only updated @1/30 second creating only partial resolution @1/60 seond, but never full resolution, which is why 60i isn't true 60fps.

[Anonymous No.3063081]

>>3063053
>>3063041
You can just say that 480i at 60fps only displays half the vertical resolution.

[Anonymous No.3063087]

>>3063021
>>3063049
I'm going to use your own template and illustrate how a legit theoretical 480i@60 might work.

60p= 1/60 second: frame one - 2/60 second: frame two
60i= 1/60 second: frame one upper half - 2/60 second: frame two lower half - 3/60 second: frame three upper half - 4/60 second: frame four lower half

You're NEVER going to get (the impression of) a whole 480i frame unless the game logic stops or legitimately runs at 30/20/15fps.

>>3063057
>Each half field is only updated @30fps

Except that's what I said?

>>3063053
>Yes. 240p > 480i. Interlacing artifacts are much more annoying than low resolution.

240p isn't exactly useful with 24/30fps content though, and I rather get the full picture for those.

[Anonymous No.3063096]

>>3063081
An autist wouldn't understand that. You have to explain in detail or they misinterpret.

>>3063087
>Except that's what I said?
If that is what you said than why did you reply like this >>3063049 if you agree? That's illogical.

[Anonymous No.3063102]

>>3063087
>Except that's what I said? If this is what you said than why did you here >>3063049 reply like I said something wrong? Maybe you are confusing me with someone else.

[Anonymous No.3063110]

>>3063096
Because I fucked up and didn't read the things you added earlier in your post, just wanted to point out that

1)"half field" is not a thing
2)my "fast, smooth illusion of high resolution" point does not collide with yours because I explicitely used the word ILLUSION, as it's not REALLY PHYSICALLY drawing 480 lines in the same vertical blank. So why did you even need to disprove it?

[Anonymous No.3063119]

>>3063096
>An autist wouldn't understand that. You have to explain in detail or they misinterpret.

Should add that combing can be worse with 60fps 480i. It certainly doesn't help in that regard anyway. There can be motion blur to an extent too.

There is no benefit to interlaced games. No benefit to running them at 480i 60fps either.

[Anonymous No.3063138]

>>3063119
Combing is not a thing on CRTs or appropriate deinterlacers.

>There is no benefit to interlaced games

Interpolation of high resolution.

>No benefit to running them at 480i 60fps either.

Maintaining smooth motion while interpolating high resolutions.

[Anonymous No.3063145]

>>3063138
That is very debatable.

[Anonymous No.3063153]

>>3063145
Sorry if I deleted the message, you wouldn't believe the autistic reasons I did so, by the way what is debatable? Combing not existing on interlaced displays, or interpolating high resolution which is a very logical thing?

[Anonymous No.3063168]

>>3063153
Fast movement looks horrible. One of the main reasons PS2 games had blur filters.

[Anonymous No.3063189]

>>3063168
For 2D stuff yeah, I can see where you're coming from. But for 3D games? There's too much stuff on screen for you to be noticing anything out of the ordinary.

[Anonymous No.3063202]

>>3063189
My main experience with 60fps 480i is PS2.
For that application it's shit and I really don't think it's good for video games at all.

Maybe if I was exposed to "true" 480i 60fps I may change my mind. But really why bother?

[Anonymous No.3063215]

>>3063202
Mine too, the hell do you think. Didn't stop me from having fun in R&C, MGS2, the Budokai games or even KOF/GG or the plethora of other games that ran at full speed. Sure there's constant field switching but the more you play the more it becomes second nature to just mind the actual motion more than the fact you're only ever looking at half a frame per second.

[Anonymous No.3063220]

>>3063215
>at half a frame per second.

Dun goofed, lol. Meant half a frame per 1/60 second.

[Anonymous No.3063228]

>>3063215
It was one the main contributing factors to me giving up on console games.

[Anonymous No.3063231]

>>3063202
>Maybe if I was exposed to "true" 480i 60fps I may change my mind
That's what the PS2 does. Interlacing is just fundamentally shit, there's no way to make it look good.

[Anonymous No.3063280]

>>3063228
>autism

[Anonymous No.3063873]

>>3062636
mipmapping is good you idiot

without it you noisy texture patterns and inefficient distance rendering

[Anonymous No.3063893]

>>3062848
I'm pretty sure it's just a one-track demo and not a full-fledged game.

[Anonymous No.3063912]

>>3063873
Except that's what makes it look good at increased resolutions (and on original consoles imo).

[Anonymous No.3063921]

Ban everyone in this thread including myself for contributing to this fucking joke of a thread

[Anonymous No.3063990]

>>3063912
>Except that's what makes it look good at increased resolutions
that's because mipmap levels need to be adjusted for the resolution otherwise they don't fucking work, that's why they are mipmap levels

> (and on original consoles imo).
you can't be this stupid. mipmaps ensure that the scaled pixel:texel mapping is as close to 1:1 as possible

without it you get nothing but pointless noise

[Anonymous No.3063992]

>>3063990
posted wrong pic

[Anonymous No.3064006]

>>3061698
448/480i is 60 fields per second on a CRT while approaching full resolution.

[Anonymous No.3064007]

>>3064006
>60 fields != 60fps

[Anonymous No.3064008]

[Anonymous No.3064039]

>>3064008
when will people learn to use integer scaling

[Anonymous No.3064043]

>>3064008

That's a 240p game. This thread is for higher resolution games.

[Anonymous No.3064159]

So what exactly happens when a game like Tekken 3 is played in 240p? What happens with the resolution?

[Anonymous No.3064174]

>>3064007
I know. But the poster stated that 60i becomes 30 full frames, this doesn't have to be the case.

[Anonymous No.3064179]

>>3063992
The benefit of mipmaps is only obvious in motion.

[Anonymous No.3064220]

[Anonymous No.3064235]

>>3064179
It's a good thing then that video games aren't animated. Wait...

[Anonymous No.3064585]

>No 240p games allowed!
I'd rather have games running at their intended resolution than being interlaced.

[Anonymous No.3065007]

>>3064585
480i is superior for 3D games that target smooth gameplay.
A game that would run 60 FPS on 240p would also run 60 FPS on 480i. Everything it has to do is alternate between half images (each 240p).
It's not good if the game drops frames, though. The persistence of vision can make 480i look like 480p, but if the hardware can't keep up, it basically turns into 240p.

[Anonymous No.3065016]

>>3065007
>480i is superior for 3D games that target smooth gameplay.
Are you retarded?

[Anonymous No.3065038]

>>3065007
>The persistence of vision can make 480i look like 480p
No, it's always flickery combing-artifact shit. The only way to prevent this is to filter it so heavily you might as well use 240p.

[Anonymous No.3065058]

ITT: one faggot mercilessly defends 480i like his life depends on it.

[Anonymous No.3065372]

>>3065007
I agree. Blur is important for 3d. That's what 2d fags don't understand. Their brain is limited. They hate photorealism.

[Anonymous No.3065860]

Always amazed by this one.