/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.5665680]

Why do people waste money on PVMemes when you can get an image this sharp from VGA monitors at 240p?

[Anonymous No.5665704]

>>5665680
Yikes. That being said, it's almost easier to find a PVMeme.
I want an old IBM CRT, but those were all trashed 20 years ago.

[Anonymous No.5665712]

>>5665704
>Yikes
Cringe

[Anonymous No.5665730]

>>5665680
>I like shitty sharp images with pixels so sharp they can make your eyes bleed

Why don't you like even sharper pixels that can cut between the atoms of your optical nerves anon?

The absolute idiocy of zoomers and more so bandwagoners.

Really anon, something this sharp isn't for retro in any way, unless you're talking about actual computer games or dreamcast. Sure, back in the day we played emulators on crt monitors, but we were also trying to use "scan line" settings in nesticle to get the effect of a regular TV. We didn't have the language or knowledge to describe what was going on, but even then we tried to make computer crt look like a regular TV.

[Anonymous No.5665776]

>>5665730
BUT MUH DITHERING
If you sit 10 feet away from the screen you can blend those pseudo transparent pixels quite nicely for free, no need for extra setup and without giving yourself high myopia.

[Anonymous No.5665778]

>>5665730
Lel get a load of this eyelet.

[Electronics Couture No.5665790]

>>5665680
Probably because they can't actually display 240p. 640x480@60hz isn't what real retro consoles output even if it offers a similar experience.

[Anonymous No.5665807]

>>5665730
I was trying to make it look as sharp as I could. That was literally why everybody liked emulators over real HW then, since CRTs were shit.

[Anonymous No.5665813]

>>5665712
>Cringe
Based

[Anonymous No.5665862]

>>5665807
>>>5665730
> was literally why everybody liked emulators over real HW then, since CRTs were shit.

Why do the most ignorant anons post the hardest??

Kid, you need to stop larping and making such wrong blanket statements. I used to send composite video out of my computer to a consumer set because it was bigger and looked less like shit.

[Anonymous No.5665865]

>>5665704
>>5665712
>>5665813
https://vocaroo.com/i/s0EkDdSP8xuN

[Anonymous No.5665889]

>>5665790
They do super resolutions that result in 240p.

[Anonymous No.5665909]

>>5665776
I said nothing of dithering, no need to put words into my mouth. I don't care if you see dithering/waterfalls whatever, I prefer the look of consumer, even with a connection that lets dithering show.

If you're setting far enough away from a crt computer monitor for dithering to "blend", that gives me a good laugh, either your eyes are shit, or you're setting across the room from a tiny assed screen. At that point, it's more pathetic than the "should I buy a 9" PVM for retro gaming" tier posts.

[Anonymous No.5665915]

>>5665865
This unironically has SOUL.

[Electronics Couture No.5665918]

>>5665889
I'm not sure exactly what you're saying but "240p“ is 480i with the scanlines laid down on top of one another for effectively half the resolution at double the frame rate. This is not the same thing as a 320x240 60hz+ signal from a computer and the two are not compatible with one another.

[Anonymous No.5665936]

>>5665680
because you cant plug in your NES to vga monitor.
But I agree PVMemes are overrated, worth something maybe for merricans, because of the RGB, but of eurofags it's every consumer set is sharp with RGB

[Anonymous No.5665949]

Games like Super Mario won't work properly on LCD/LED TVs it will slow down and you won't be able to speedrun. It will double pixels and everything will look kinda shitty.

[Anonymous No.5665986]

>>5665949
Dilate.

[Anonymous No.5666071]

>>5665680

[Anonymous No.5666556]

>>5665909
>Consumer

[Anonymous No.5666652]

>>5666556
That's ok, your laughing has further outed you as a bandwaggoning zoomer.

[Anonymous No.5666663]

>>5665680
Because that looks like garbage.

[Anonymous No.5666671]

>>5665730
Speak for yourself. Emulators were when I first felt I could really see the game for the first time without hideous blur. I have never understood people wanting to slap filters on. Give me the sharpest image possible.

[Anonymous No.5666787]

>>5665712
>>5665813
have sex.

[Anonymous No.5666790]

>>5665730
Imagine trying to bait and this is what you come up with.

[Anonymous No.5666817]

>>5665712
>Cringe
oof

[Anonymous No.5666823]

>>5666671
This desu. Some people prefer the soft, textured look CRTs give an image. I don’t. But then again you can upscale nicely on VGA monitors, so this becomes more of a debate solely about sharpness as opposed to display tech.

[Anonymous No.5666839]

>>5665862
I was using NESticle and ZSNES back in the day, asshole. We didn't have VGA to component adapters.

[Anonymous No.5666857]

>>5666839
t. poorfag

[Anonymous No.5666859]

[Anonymous No.5667229]

>>5666790
>Imagine trying to bait and this is what you come up with.
Got another one boys!

[Anonymous No.5667232]

>>5666839
Reading comprehension isn't your strong point is it? COMPOSITE. Many cards, even those that came with your pc had composite. I had a mid tier compaq that had a composite out.

[Anonymous No.5667870]

>>5667232
Whatever man, it was a typo. I didn't know anyone who had that in the late 90s anyway, I only ever saw VGA

[Anonymous No.5667884]

>>5665680
I was never able to get custom resolutions to work on my pc, otherwise I'd love to try 240p @ 120 hz on my Multiscan 15sx

[Anonymous No.5667895]

>>5667884
Just do 480p @ 60 Hz with 100% scanlines. Same effect.

[Electronics Couture No.5667912]

>>5667895
Or at 120hz with BFI

[Anonymous No.5667926]

>>5666556
>consumer lel
CRTs that were made for a widespread base that still can be found for under $20 on buy/sell sites. What's so funny about that?

[Anonymous No.5668098]

>>5666790
Wecome to nu-/vr/.

[Anonymous No.5668114]

>>5665865
best post in the last six months

[Anonymous No.5668154]

>>5667232
But that outputs 480i.

[Anonymous No.5668456]

>>5667926
Look at this cope.

[Anonymous No.5668532]

>>5665807
>That was literally why everybody liked emulators over real HW then, since CRTs were shit.
Oh I see
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about

[Anonymous No.5668580]

>>5665730
Lmao who the fuck gets this offended by people wanting a crisp image

[Anonymous No.5668585]

>>5668580
Who's offended? Certainly not me. You have to amp up your point of discussions til it's almost trolling to get any discussion going on here. It's sad but it's the way of nu/vr/.

[Anonymous No.5668593]

I don't get this quest for ultra sharp, clean and perfect looking crt image.

To me the charm of CRT is the organic looking pixels and general imperfections that came with the technology. If I wanted super sharp ultra RGB deblur HD I'd just play on an emulator.

[Anonymous No.5668608]

>>5668593
Very wise assessment. Honestly I don't care how others display games, but I personally feel how you do. They just look good, with minimal fuss.

[Anonymous No.5668634]

>>5665680
Line doubled 480p looks better because it doesn't huge ugly scanlines.

[Anonymous No.5668672]

>>5666787
cope

[Anonymous No.5668690]

>>5668634
Thicc scanlines are sexy tho.

[Anonymous No.5669347]

>>5668672
seething

[Anonymous No.5669357]

>>5667229
>"I replied to his post now what do I do!??"

[Anonymous No.5669683]

>>5665730
>played games on a shitty consumer crt as a kid
>didn't think much of image quality
>today play those same games on a pvm or on a hdtv/monitor through an ossc to get a nice sharp clear image
>think the games look great and better than they did back in the day
>get told you are wrong and that no one cared about image quality in the past

[Anonymous No.5670156]

>>5665680
That's what I do, but you can't easily find 15hz friendly VGA monitors. Gotta get an OSSC or something similar and convert to VGA.

Gag on those scanlines. Gimme a good 640x480 line doubled NES image.

[Anonymous No.5672395]

you better hope none of the games you play have an all white screen or your eyes will bleed out of your skull at 60hz on a pc monitor

[Anonymous No.5675251]

>>5666787

[Anonymous No.5675253]

>>5665813
>based
oof