Where did this rumor originate?
Why do people legitimately think game designers sat down and thought
>Well, since our game signal is going to be transmitted through blurry RF, we will design the graphics around it.
This has to be a joke, right?
Here we go again.
>>2881418
No?
I hear it again and again, that game designers intended their games to look muddy with scanlines.
Yet the original Master System included RGB natively, and 70s and 80s handhelds that used pixel graphics used LCD screens with no scanlines at all.
>>2881425
????
They knew it was being displayed on CRT screens, that is what they knew their images would look like. The OP jpeg is the perfect example. They knew or had a very good idea how it was going to show up for the home consoles. So wtf are you trying to say?
>>2881432
>Being this dumb and not understanding that games were not designed with RF and scanlines in mind
because pixels are an illusion and crt blur hides the pixels but i will literally report you if you use a linear filter in an emulator grrrr quit hiding the pixels
>>2881441
RF usually doesn't have visible scanlines.
>>2881406
It didnt look like in that picture, stop being a dumbass
They were designed with scanlines in mind, consoles displayed 240p, not 480i
And for video signals, it really depended on the developer and console. Arcades where made for RGB
>>2881447
>composite and RF cables
>240p
Anon...
>FFVI come out on PC
>The character sprites are a blurry mess
>Someone already made a mod that removes bilinear filtering
>There are people working one updating all the sprites to their SNES version
God bless PC gaming.
but seriously i don't buy it. you dont lose any fidelity or fuck up the artist's vision by playing on an lcd. crt's dont enrich the experience in any way that isn't nostalgic and unless your picture is completely shot you can still see the pixels anyway.
>>2881448
Are you implying that composite and RF don't carry 240p for retro games?
http://www.chrismcovell.com/gotRGB/rgb_compare2.html
>>2881457
No, the fact it's progressive means it's not meant to have any kind of refresh/scan lines.
>>2881441
You are a fool.
I told you what the designers knew about what they were creating and how it would turn out, that is a fact.
>>2881460
But if you put a 320x240 image on a 640x480 screen, you're going to have gaps between lines. Unless the TV draws the lines twice as wide.
This fucking thread again? Goddamnit OP, how did you get to be such a faggot?
Its not like developers had super sharp screens themselves for their design work. It wasn't an issue until LCD's became common place that people were suddenly having to deal with upscaling taking a relatively long time and pixel perfect emulation ending up looking like shit because pixels were WAY larger than they were in the past.
It's more accurate to say that sprite games were visually designed with pixels in mind, and the size of those pixels were relatively constant, with the whole issue of upscaling being a natural feature of the technology built in to displays anyway.
The whole issue basically became moot once everyone transitioned to polygons anyway. Then it became a matter of textures just becoming obviously worse once you went past a certain resolution. It's only an issue on /vr/ because people want to argue about their A/V knowledge or personal set up.
>>2881467
>upscaling
>>2881476
We're talking about putting 240p on a standard definition tv. Not upscaling.
>>2881459
first page
http://www.chrismcovell.com/gotRGB/rgb_compare.html
second page its just there to show how shitty the genesis composite is
Is /vr/ doomed to be trolled by CRT/LCD/RF/Emulator/whatever threads forever?
>>2881484
Only until people stop caring.
>>2881425
Dude, how retarded are you? Of course they were designed with that shit in mind when it was what tech they had at the time. They knew what they were working with.
Besides, SCART/RGB is definitive. Why don't you shut the fuck up and go back to /v/?
>>2881441
This isn't even an argument. Fuck off back to /v/.
>>2881406
>Well, since our game signal is going to be transmitted through blurry RF, we will design the graphics around it.
Yes, this is exactly what happened, you stupid fucking cunt faggot who should die instantly.
>>2881496
>Of course they were designed with that shit in mind when it was what tech they had at the time. They knew what they were working with.
My cousin used an old projector in the 90s. What about the scanlines on projectors.
>>2881503
>since our game signal is going to be transmitted through blurry RF, we will design the graphics around it.
>Yes, this is exactly what happened,
>Sega Master System supports RGB natively
>>2881506
>My cousin used an old projector in the 90s. What about the scanlines on projectors.
No you're right, the developers had literally no way of knowing that the pixels would blur on the major market device used to play them. Boy were they surprised on release day, haha, those were the days huh?
>>2881514
>Game Boy
>>2881510
>Sega Master System supports RGB natively
So you proved your point, the developers were fucking shocked that the games didn't look the same.
I mean, they had no way of knowing.
>>2881506
projectors are even more blurry than crts and lets not forget laggy
there was literally no reason to use one of them during development of a game
>>2881525
No scanlines though
>developers had scanlines in mind!
Explain this shit then, Christians.
>>2881510
>It's a little known fact that game developers didn't have access to a TV when making games
>Until scanlines became obsolete, they had no way of knowing the pixels weren't clear, no way at all in the known universe
>Even less known fact
>Nobody who ever developed a game ever looked at a TV, ever, ever
>>2881406
It originated on /x/. There was a thread about telepathy in which somebody actually managed to read the minds of a bunch of people. Several hundred of those people turned out to be Japanese men who had once worked as Famicom or Sega Master System game developers. All of those people turned out to hold memories of the games being designed with that in mind.
It's understandable that you didn't know, since without telepathy applied to a large number of people, nobody could have found this out. But obviously this crappy forum where a lot of doughy, powerless men spend their time would have the special expertise for the job. Because we're special and important. We're Us! And we know everything.
>>2881526
>>2881539
> All of those people turned out to hold memories of the games being designed with that in mind.
This was the only evidence we had for the longest time, until somebody realized that TV's date back much further than first anticipated, and that it was highly likely that one of these men had used them at least once during their lifetime.
They were put to death for their knowledge, we now know that they may have even owned a TV for development purposes, but Travis had to bring it in from his house and his wife would get annoyed because she wanted to watch Roots.
>>2881503
Signal transfer seems like a distant concern as far as design goes. It really only comes in to play in a few 3rd gen and a lot of 4th gen games when pixel colors were meant to blur together. 2nd and 3rd gen were basically all about working within the limitations of the hardware. Who gives a shit if the signal is going to be RF when you're stuck with 4 colors per sprite at 8x16? Limitations on signal would only have come in to play during the 4th generation when you had 256 colors and sprite artists who wanted to get fancy with their colors to the point of alternating a pair of pixel colors to generate the impression of a 3rd, or because they could actually shade sprites now.
>>2881552
Get that wife a Retron!
>>2881554
>Dad, had you ever seen a television before you developed Zelda?
>Television?? What's a TV??
>*Jumps out window and runs away*
>>2881449
Or you could not be a moron and pay for a half baked port that everyone knew was shit.
>>2881406
>he thinks Nintendo devs thought the Famicom had a PPU and output RGB
It would still have scanlines faggit
>>2881457
RF and composite are always interlaced, always.
>>2881496
SCART is eurotrash, and RGB isn't definitive for /every/ retro console. If it's not generated natively by the original hardware, it can't be definitive. FC/NES is a good example.
>>2882069
You're wrong
>>2881406
They didn't design with scanlines specifically, but they would've been testing on CRT monitors, because that's what people were using back then. Colour LCD/TFT and such tech wasn't economically viable until the 2000s.
>>2882080
lol. show me a fucking progressive scan composite image (pro-tip, you can't).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kILeyo1iv0A
>developers didn't develop games using currently existing technology, they time traveled into the future and brought back 40 inch LCDs to design games on
oh okay
>>2881406
>>2881460
this would seem to imply that the developers tested their games on a 320x240 screen which is just laughable
>>2882101
they used monitors which displayed pure RGB.
>>2882142
source on this please
>>2882142
And they still had to design their games around the fact that most people would only be playing their game through RF or composite.
Hence, all those dithering tricks.
>>2882142
Which still had blurring and scanlines
>>2881406
PS1 games were designed so that the signal would mask distant wobbling polygons and help remedy the lack of texture filtering, but of course PC mustards would blow it up to 1920x1080 and complain why the ground is made out of jumping beans, HUD looking like the most stretched pixelated shit ever and too noticeable dithering patterns.
The PS1 hardware and its output are misunderstood by most. It's not like the N64 where texture filtering can help with the eye strain at high resolution, or MSAA and anisotropic filtering, or unlimited internal resolution increase via emulation. Because you know, people think emulation is an accurate representation of the real thing.
Pic related is my PS2 doing 2x integer internally, with s-video signal. I love the texture mapping, the crispness of the nearest neighbor textures, the dithering on the smoke, HUD still looks alright, and oh look - no fucking wobbling.
>>2881406
>Where did this rumor originate?
See picture for details.
TL;DR - Reality.
>>2882085
My Super Nintendo was always hooked up via composite video RCA. It was 224p
Try the CRT thread if you want pictures
RF and composite can't display more than 24fps
>>2881446
RF does have as much scanlines as does the other signals if it's 240p... you're probably just confused because the OP picture doesn't have any visible scanlines (probably because it's photographed on a low resolution tube which doesn't really have very apparent scanlines)
>>2882134
But they did, you dolt. Your regular old TV *is* a 320x240 screen.
These people are mentally ill.
When Miyamoto was tracing squares on graph paper to design Super Mario, the last thing we was thinking of was scanlines.
>>2882198
>>2881406
>>Well, since our game signal is going to be transmitted through blurry RF, we will design the graphics around it.
Maybe because the monitors they were using to develop the game were also those same CRT monitors. Monitors without scanlines didn't even exist back then.
>>2882191
>>2882085
As far as I know composite cannot carry 480p, i.e. all 480 lines being drawn on the same cycle, which is 'true' "progressive scan". Half resolution negates the need for it, advantage being 60fps gameplay. 240p is 'progressive' only because there are no two fields to try and interlace.
So yes, composite only carries interlaced video. But the signal has to be displaying enough lines for interlacing to occur for this to matter, making 240 lines a weird inbetween.
>>2882207
Some developers did, some developers didn't.
>>2882218
Technically 240p is just a wierd hack on top of 480i. What does differentiate it, and this is what it gets the other name "Double Strike" from, is that the even and odd fields are aligned such that their individual lines will hit the same spot, compared with regular 480i where the even and odd fields will alternate using even and odd lines (thus the name even and odd fields)
>>2882205
What? It's got 480 lines total, an SDTV just lacks the capability to draw all the lines at once...
>>2882227
Ok, we'll just ascribe it to a difference in terminology.
There are CRTs that will display 240p with almost no scanlines though. I guess those could be called 320x240 monitors.
>>2882226
Thank you for clarifying that. Bottom line I guess, there are no even/odd fields occurring, so it's not quite progressive but is effectively not interlaced.
>>2881432
this makes sense for me
>>2882227
>Ok, we'll just ascribe it to a difference in terminology.
In what terminology exactly? I'm a little lost.
>I guess those could be called 320x240 monitors.
Uhh, I have a set that does this and it's literally just an effect of the way the shadow mask was built. It minimizes its own scanlines. But it's a 480i, standard definition television.
Unless it legitimately has 320 horizontal and 240 vertical lines it's not a 320x240 monitor. It is the resolution it's built to have, whatever that is. As far as televisions are concerned, 480 lines is a standardized resolution and you will not find an NTSC set with fewer.
>>2882119
RGB looks the best to me, but I think the devs tried to exploit composite for the waterfall.
You still get scan lines with RGB and I don't think anyone claims Game Boy games were deigned to be played with scan lines.
>>2882142
I'm sure they did, but I'm sure they also realised that many of their consumers would not have such monitors at home. As far as I'm aware RGB isn't really common on TV's outside of Europe, and while it may not have been a universal practice I'm sure some studios that would have worked with consumer grade hardware in mind.
I know it's fairly common in the music industry to make sure music sounds good on the speakers consumers are likely to have. I'm sure it's not unheard of. The transparency effects in some of the Megadrives 1st party games certainly appear to have been designed with lower quality video in mind. Though I've never seen any primary source confirm this.
>>2882826
>I'm sure it's not unheard of.
I'm sure it's not unheard of in the games industry.
There are visual effects in some games that mimic transparency. Clearly meant for CRTs. The designers knew the people buying the games would not hook them up to a PC level monitor...EVER. You watch some of the visual effects on a LCD it looks like blinking shit. There is no way that designers intended the graphics to be so blocky looking. It was just a limitation of the hardware. So there ya go.
>>2881527
SMB's designers drew out all of their graphics on graph paper before putting it into their games. It's made to be blocky.
>>2881406
So you're claiming this was how it was intended to look, then?
>>2881406
What's up with the color of that sword?
>dithering is made to work with blur
dithering is also made to work with your eyes/brain. Most dithering will give the impression of in-between colors with or without blur.
>developers didn't think about RF/composite
Some developers were obviously aware of composite, but usually graphics were planned out on graph paper. If it looks good sharp, it looks good blurry.
>scanlines, etc.
First of all, handheld LCD screens have "scanlines" as well if you look up close. It's just the blacked out reigon between each subpixel. If you can give me a good explanation as to how I'd make a game "with scanlines in mind", I'd like to hear it.
>>2882834
Dithered transparency in mode 13h. This was clear and sharp on original hardware, with no obvious scanlines. The dither was not blurred out.
And the same technique was used in portable LCD based systems, which also had sharp pixels.
>>2882893
No need to waste a sprite on the sword. If you want you it to have its own color you'll end up with a flickery slow mess like the Megaman games.
>>2882910
even with a composite filter, that shit in the lower left isn't going to look any better.
>>2882910
15" displays were common in the time of mode 13h. Most of them were even SVGA compatible. Mode 13h on hardware of the time looked very close to integer nearest neighbor + LCD.
>>2882907
but most flickering problems on LCD are related interpolation.
trasnparent characters after being hit like megaman x
waves on chemical plant's pink water from sonic 2.
etc. this kinds of effects looks like shit on LCD for its filters or like shit in youtube since the video runs at 30fps and not 60 which makes that thing even invisible.
even when some people says 60, they look bad because shit interpolation filter over the video.
>>2881406
poor 80s kids who grew up with shitty TVs trying to cope for their shitty childhood by convincing themselves that the games they played as kids were *supposed* to look like shit. They probably think high-pitched bad CRT whine and poor-quality speakers were intended elements of gameplay, too.
I was born in 1990 and I'm pretty sure I had never even seen a scanline before I started browsing /vr/. At the very least, certainly never any noticeable ones.
>>2882952
you're about as likely to remember scanlines as you are to remember any specific details about the 240p era
>>2882952
You've never played a retro console on a crt?
>>2882952
OP doesn't say or show scanlines as the comparison, but a CRT shadow mask and bloom. Most consumer CRTs used a shadow mask.
>>2882952
Those things on a CRT are all scanlines shithead, that's the way it's displayed. Your claim is the same as saying you've never seen a pixel. I'm looking at scanlines right now because I'm using a CRT, which I literally got for free because I needed a quality display with 120Hz and perfect display contrast and crystal clear with zero ghosting effect whatsoever. Something that you'd pay hundreds or thousands of dollars to this day to get in LCD.
>>2883112
samefag.
I'm seriously beginning to believe that we're being had, that this is all one guy just making up nonsense and having a laugh at our expense. Nobody could be as stupid as OP and a couple of the people who've been posting here are supposed to be, and I hear also the exact same thread has been done multiple times before. All one sad, lonely little man saying nonsense things online and giggling to himself at the legitimate responses to it.
>>2883112
120Hz + BFI lets you have real native 240p scanlines on a 31kHz+ CRT, but they are way too sharp looking. You get more realistic results with shaders.
>>2883121
>realistic
>shaders
>>2882952
How old are you? 8? 10?
Cause if youre older, then you should remember.
The last time this thread was posted I linked to an interview/let's play with a guy that worked on Disney games for the Megadrive. Looks like I'll be posting it again.
He says that the games don't look how they were designed to look when played on modern TVs because the artists at the time designed the dithering to blend on CRTs and create smoothe gradients. He also goes on to say that you would need additional technology to create that affect on new TVs (I'm guessing he means emulation CRTs with blurring and scanlines).
https://youtu.be/kILeyo1iv0A?t=600
If the time code doesn't work, he says it at ten minutes into the video.
>>2883437
Sorry, I got the time wrong. It's 1 minute and 30 seconds into the video, not 10 minutes. He says immediately that you wouldn't be able to see individual pixels clearly back in the day, either.
>>2883219
He's probably some young adult who's first console was the PS2.
>>2883437
It's always seemed obvious to me the graphics were often made with that in mind, on the Megadrive at least. But it's nice to see a developer confirm it.
>>2883471
Exactly. Sega was doing that shit all the way through to the Saturn. If anything, RGB makes games on that machine look worse.
>>2881406
It originated a long time in the past. Long before you were born.
Games have always been designed with the most probable use cases in mind.
Why the fuck wouldn't they be?
Games designed for LCDs in handhelds will be designed for those screens. Terrible viewing angles and blocky resolutions led to different color choices and sprite construction.
Games designed for use on CRT-attached consoles will be designed for those screens. Noise introduced by single-wire video was often exploited with dithering to create transparency or display more colors than would normally be possible with the game hardware.
If you didn't take advantage of something like dot blending on a CRT and your competitor did, their games would look better than yours and you'd have put yourself at a disadvantage. And for what? All because you don't know how TVs work?
>>2883638
This, and early GBA games were designed to have super washed-out colors to accommodate the really dim lighting.
>>2883638
>>2884108
Boom bitch get out the way. So tired of these stupid ass ignorant troll threads. Thanks for these posts.
/thread
Anybody that believes the N64's anti-aliasing algorithm was not designed with CRT screens in mind is very very silly.
>>2884191
Is that why I think the N64 version of Banjo Kazooie looks better than the Xbox 360 version?
Were the diagonal stripes intended?
>>2881406
Maybe we should get an actual developer from the 80s and 90s in here to answer this question.
Of course they were designed around it.
It's not like fucking video game developers magically had high definition flatscreen lcd screens while making games. They had the same tvs everyone else had at the time.
>>2884219
Try contacting Ryuichi Nishizawa about that
>>2884205
Shut up, faggot.
>>2884260
What the fuck /v/? It was a genuine question.
>>2884205
I think so
>>2882952
>I was born in 1990
>wevegotabadass.jpg
>>2882142
No they didn't. They used whatever Sony/NEC they could get their hands on.
>>2882142
>>Implying chink devs back then had enough money to afford "pure" RGB CRTs.
EBIN
>>2881597
Honestly why isn't everyone's opinion this?
You vote with your wallet. And all money thrown at that port, is regression.
I agree with whole CRT/scanlines thing but not RF. Where I live TVs had SCART since 80s.
>>2884413
I developed games on composite in the early 80's Anyone who disagrees and was actually already born at the time feel free to chime in.
>>2884413
CGA monitors with like 8 colors you mean?
>>2886172
what games did you work on?
I've been outputting a 240p (256 x 224p @ 4:3 @ 59.97fps) signal from my Wii lately to play Link to the Past via the Virtual Console. I do so through component. Looks good.
>>2886192
SNES Jr. RGB mod is light years better than a Wii through component. Not saying the Wii looks bad though..
>>2886213
I'd rather ouput accurate refresh and 15.7 KHz signal from my Radeon HD 4000 to my PVM.
>>2886251
>accurate
>Radeon HD 4000
lol
>>2886258
Yeah it only comes within one 10,000th of a Hz, from 48 Hz through 62+
Game Boys always used an LCD screen.
The Super Game Boy allowed you to play these games on a CRT screen.
These games look absolutely fine when played on a different monitor, without needing any changes.
And when NES games were ported to the GB and GBC, the graphics often had little or no changes.
>>2886284
The Super Gameboy put a huge bezel around the represented Gameboy screen in order to give the pixels "squareness".
Isn't it possible that this is just a case by case situation? Some game developers know about the issue with composite or RF, while others might have just used CRT monitors and not care.
>>2886287
The NES / Famicom can't output RGB broseph.
If they were using monitors it was through composite or RF connections.
>>2886287
I highly doubt they didn't know, at least for Famicom. Unless there is some dev unit that supported RGB (the Titler didn't come out until '89), the retail Famicoms that they would have used to test their games only did RF. The most likely answer is that some took advantage of the display technology (see: that recent MD Aladdin video) and others didn't care as long as they got their work done.
However, they all knew their games would be played on a consumer CRT, how a consumer CRT displayed (no shit), and that most people would use RF or composite (depending on the stock output capabilities of the console, of course). I guarantee you that almost no developers for the NES/Fami knew or cared that one day people would play their games in RGB.
>>2886286
Care to explain it to us ?
>>2886308
Like this
>>2884265
It's about as genuine as asking "was the non-1080p resolution intended?"
>>2886352
Shut up, faggot.
>>2886298
>I guarantee you that almost no developers for the NES/Fami knew or cared that one day people would play their games in RGB.
Where is your God now?
>>2884205
>using emulator screenshot to make a point
Kill yourself
Miyamoto at work in the 80s.
I saw a video with commentary from one of the original developers of the Lion King game on SNES/Genesis awhile back. He made a comment about how the guy who was playing it happened to be using a TV that made the pixels look sharp (the way you'd see them on an emulator), and went on to say that that wasn't the look they had in mind for it. It was intended to look the way it would with scan lines on a typical early 90's TV. That way, the sprites would blur so they looked less jagged, to closer emulate the cartoon it was based off of. Here's the video, if you're interested.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kILeyo1iv0A
That was just one dev team's take on it of course, I'm sure there were plenty on both sides, but it was interesting to hear someone who was an actual member of the industry speak out on something that's debated about so heatedly by people who weren't even alive at the time on the internet.
>>2886728
I'm not trying to make a point you retard. I was just wondering if the effect was intentional or an after-effect
If you want the "authentic" experience just play it on a CRT like the Lord intended.
>>2887361
>>2887361
Tah-tay?
>>2886383
That's an afterthought. The money was in home consoles.
>>2881597
the port is fine except for the graphics. if you paint a new sports car in clown colors does that automatically make it shit?
>>2887637
>the money was in home consoles
>>2886317
I have no idea what I'm looking for
>>2882119
This image makes a good argument.
I'm still going to use LCDs, mind you, but it does look best on the right.
>>2887905
Are those emulator shoots or a real screen?
If real screen it's not an aperture grill. With a 'Tron or the right Mitsubishi you'd see clean horizontal lines with no differentiation via vertical lines.
>>2887942
I don't know, I didn't post it
>>2887942
>>2887943
>>2887879
>Is it a huge pile of shit? Because that's what it looks like.
Go to sleep James.
>>2884403
Yeah, the world capital of console and arcade game development wasn't able to afford equipment. Sounds legit.
>in the whole game development, the devs never plugged the console with the game to a tv to see how it looked like, and even if they did, they would not make changes based on it.
>>2887361
From what Contra is this?
>always listen to the CRTfags
>decide to get a TV
>plug in my old PS1
>looks almost just pixelated as an emulator
>plug in my NES
>still looks like an emulator where you can count every pixel
Am I missing something here? To get something like the OP picture I would have to deliberately try to mess up my cables or something.
>>2888159
idk
I use RGB, not a CRT.
>>2881406
It's a new year OP. Let's let this dead horse decompose.
You are questioning if the limitations of the medium had any influence on artists of the day. The answer is that it did on some and not on others. Which is true of any medium in arts history. Ever.
The mere fact that you recognize the existence of 'this rumor' is proof enough that there is different opinion on the subject. Here's a hint: artists weren't blind to their medium. Whether some designed based on what they thought would look good on graph paper, or others with the humility to also check if it looked good on a TV, welp, that's the artist's discretion, and the rest is up to how the audience receives it.
Same thing with scanline vs no scanline
Same thing with square vs non-square pixels
Same thing with how I set the tint and saturation on my fucking CRT
The only thing that matters is that you enjoy the art, not to tell other people that they aren't enjoying the art in the right way. Art transcends the artist's intentions anyway. Period. And if the artist can't define how their art relates to the audience, how in Sonic's name do you think you have any right to tell others their wrong on the subject?
If some millennial faggot can see the difference in 2016, I doubt it slipped by the people in 1985 who made it their fucking business to make kick-ass games because not only did some pour their souls into their work, their livelihoods also depended on it.
Fuck you OP. Let's stop posting in these shit threads together as a community /vr/. You guys are older and smarter than that. The janitor sure as hell isn't here to help.
Instead let's have threads exploring how people used their mediums, whether they used it in creative or other wise notable ways, and made us see something a little different in the little glowing rectangles that consumer our lives. Forget these bait threads and -est threads. ew. Elevate the dialog.
>>2888376
>>2888379
Integer ratio you fucking retard
>>2887373
agreed. this attitude like having a bunch of blocky looking trash is better seems like a troll argument
>>2888151
Super Contra arcade if I recall correctly
>>2888504
>if you scale
>implying there is scale at all
Lel.
>>2888163
Have a (You), because no one replies to well thought out or insightful posts.
>>2883437
>designed the dithering to blend on CRTs and create smoothe gradients. He also goes on to say that you would need additional technology to create that affect on new TVs
>blend on CRTs
>additional technology to create that affect on new TVs
How do you explain >>2882119 then? He's wrong, composite is the source of the blending, not the monitor. Tell that guy to stop being retarded.
>>2888636
WTF are you talking about? SF2 wasn't 800x600 native resolution.
>>2881449
Why not just play the GBA version with the colour correctoin/ sound replacement mods?
it's gr8 for a phone
>>2888163
>When a lot of 8-bit games were coming out, LCD technology already existed
>There were inklings in the early to mid 90s that LCD screens were going to take over and CRTs were headed out
>By late 90s and early 2000s, LCDs were pretty prominent and expanding
>You think Game Designers planned to make their games with scanlines when they were aware other display technology existed and was becoming more commonplace
HD CRT monitors did NOT have scanlines. I had one in the early 2000s. It exceeded 1080, actually.
The guy who worked for ID Software and programmed Doom and Quake had one of the earliest ones. He was certainly not programming with scanlines in mind.
>>2888731
And both are in the same ress, so what's your point?
You can go ahead and take your own unfiltered print screen of sf2 if you want, it will not bring it any improvement.
![super_mario_maker_mustache.0[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/euh7t8O.jpg "super_mario_maker_mustache.0[1].jpg")
>>2889047
>>2881449
>god bless PC gaming
This is the problem with PC gaming. People is so willing to fix the games themselves, developers just don't give a shit about quality games on PC. Why even care to make it good if the community is going to do our job for free!
>>2888905
They're just too small to see
>>2889107
PLUS GORGEOUS 8MIN FMVS
>How could I forget the most important thing
>>2889092
Shh.
>>2888895
They didn't fucking use LCDS to make NES games, holy shit.
>>2889032
>And both are in the same ress, so what's your point?
The point is you scaled it wrong. If you are using a non-integer ratio (which you must in the case of SF2, because of the rectangular pixels), you must pre-scale with integer ratio nearest neighbor to avoid the uneven pixel size artifacts.
>>2889178
Compare to plain non-integer nearest neighbor. The dithering is completely messed up, the red stripes on the poles in the background are uneven, everybody's faces look deformed, etc. This is the problem illustrated in >>2888504
>>2889182
Despite the rectangular pixels, you can have at least one axis be integer ratio if you choose the right size. You get more sharpness this way.
>>2889186
But you still need to prescale with integer nearest neighbor, and apply a resampling filter in the horizontal axis, otherwise you get the same kind of distortion as in >>2889182
>In one of my first conversations with Dan Malone, he lamented that stills of older games are now largely captured from emulators and therefore have hard-edged pixels. He reminded me that CRT screens gave the imagery a unique personality, and that the Bitmaps selected their colour palettes carefully, using the nuances of the display to make their visuals sing.
Dan Malone was one of the best graphic artist during the 16 bit era. He worked on most of Bitmap Brothers' games like Speedball 2, Gods, Chaos Engine, etc.
>>2882207
>When Miyamoto was tracing squares on graph paper to design Super Mario, the last thing we was thinking of was scanlines.
He didn't intend for him to be all blocky either, but that's what technology allowed him to do in the early 80s.
Also the whole reason for planning out graphics on graph paper is because in early games they were hard coded into the game as binary data. No Photoshop to fuck around with.
>>2881406
>>2889292
actually people playing on emulator see this.
stay pressed bitch
emulated looks best tbqfh
>>2889061
That's an optional screen mode for weirdos like you. When you play the game normally it looks sharp, not blurry.
>>2889292
still think far right looks best, i don't know why the fuck this is even debatable
I don't give a shit either way, I just want to see more screenshots. Preferably PS1 games since they relied on dithering.
>>2889357
But that looks digusting
>>2889292
>Nintendo is an indie developer
The very people who make the game show it looking more like the "indie" example than any other. You are living in a fantasy world if you think it was supposed to be a blurry mess of shit like the example you show.
>>2889536
Interdasting.
>>2889536
You're thinking of projection TVs, not projectors.
Projection TVs were susceptible to burn in, so things that would be constantly onscreen in a game (HUDs, scores, etc) could burn into the screen if the game was played for too long.
>>2889571
Ah, thanks for the correction.
>>2889521
only if you are a indie dev. my condolences.
>>2889571
Burn in is an issue with CRT and LCD projectors. How you reach the conclusion that because an image is being projected from the back it's susceptible to burn in but immune if it's projected from the front is quite frankly disturbing to my faith in mankind.
>>2889762
Image persistence and total burn in are two different things anon.
>>2889869
Nobody suggested it wasn't.
>>2881432
He's trying to say he has brain damage.
>>2889920
See an optician, it's not normal to have such bad vision.
>>2882181
What game is this?
>>2889942
i do agree with him. they all very quite looks the same.
>>2882181
thats why i play ps1 games with bilinear blur.
>>2889957
Mods should just start banning anyone who asks the name of a game when it's in the filename.
>>2889869
You're sounding even crazier. Maybe time to take a break?
>>2889920
get glasses
>>2889983
If I knew that, I wouldn't be asking.
Then again, what do I expect from the umpteenth thread on this board arguing about who's nostalgia filter looks better
Never let any woman tell you that CRT shaders look ugly on LCDs.
>>2881503
Could you give an example or something, what exactly they did to their art while keeping bad signal in mind?
And don't say dithering, because the same artists were using it for PC and arcade games that didn't suffer from shit signal and it worked just as well.
The scanlines thing is less of a factor than how outright blurry and grainy the picture was on an old 80's TV with just coax/RF. Even so, the games looked nice. Later on I plugged an NTSC Amiga 500 with its A520 (RF modulator box) into the TV and it was totally unusable in Workbench in 80-column mode. Just too damn blurry to make out the characters. I guess that's why they had a 60-column option, and that was good enough so long as you didn't spend hours staring at text. But otherwise it was very usable for games, and even doing pixel art in Deluxe Paint. Getting a real monitor later on improved things a lot though (although their 15 KHz 1084 series is still relatively grainy compared to VGA PC monitors).
>>2892072
NEC PCs had composite output doe.
>>2892696
Actually I just remembered there was another option in the 80's. This type antenna jack box was pretty common, as it wasn't guaranteed your TV would even have a coax port! Can't remember using this though, except maybe with a TRS-80 that my neighbors had.
>>2892704
PC88 had RGB output since PC-8801mkII SR, the first model that can actually play games.
>>2892763
It's called an RF switch. The NES even came boxed with one. I used it all through my childhood; of course, I didn't know any better back then.
>>2890037
just liek i remenbur
So wait, was I not supposed to use the antenna cable thing to connect my SNES to my TV? Because from what I'm aware that was the only way to do it until N64 came out with composite. What does the antenna cable thing do differently?
>>2888895
who are you quoting?
>>2895693
Pretty sure I got one with myPS2ffs
>>2881406
They DID.
>>2881406
>you draw the graphics on a computer with scanlines
>what you see while making it is what you get while its running on the console
Nothing has changed.
Just fucking tell me what emulator settings match what the devs intended the closest.
>>2896083
For Japanese devs: sharp-bilinear
For PC games (including PC-88/PC-98), or portable systems: sharp-bilinear
For American devs: it's a mystery
Fuck this goddamn thread. Why couldn't it have died today?
>>2896083
Hint, nobody in this thread knows 'what the devs intended'. It's just them spewing their opinions and trying to dress them up as fact. I initially thought these were troll threads, but no troll could possibly sustain any level of amusement for this long on a no-where board like /vr/. Even if there was an actual fucking dev in this thread that developed retro games during the era in question and told us how THEY developed for particular games, they would still not represent the broad design methodologies of all developers. You would have to survey them all, and you are bound to find differing opinions on how to do art. Fuck, I can't even form a consensus half the time with my lab mates on fucking science, a field underpinned by indisputable objective reality.
It's like saying that all oil painters 'intend' their art to look like Van Gogh's, because hey, you really like how he did things.
This topic is so stupid. Who the fuck thinks people do things one way and one way only? Childish simpletons who can't wrap their heads around that the world isn't black and white, that's who. This whole cancerous thread is proof positive that there are different opinions even amongst couch-devs who will never put their own opinions to the test, let alone people who actually made it their fucking job to produce cutting edge graphics or be swallowed by the dog-eat-dog world of computer game development.
>>2896186
>It's like saying that all oil painters 'intend' their art to look like Van Gogh's, because hey, you really like how he did things.
No it's more like saying that oil painters intended their paintings to look the way they did when they painted with oil instead of looking like a shiny photograph of their painting. Which can be passable, but still not the painting as intended which we know because it's the painting they made with the materials they made it with.
Many of us know what the devs intended because we are massively brain damaged. When transparency effects work as intended and were that way for 100% of the people who played the fucking thing back in the day, we can pretty surely say what was fucking intended.
>>2896186
>Fuck, I can't even form a consensus half the time with my lab mates on fucking science, a field underpinned by indisputable objective reality.
That's probably because they're busy arguing with you being a fucking retard. Maybe find a field of study more suitable to your special abilities, like for example documenting all the different flavors of lead paint you ate as a child.
>>2896186
>Hint, nobody in this thread knows 'what the devs intended'. It's just them spewing their opinions
You should scald your own hands under hot tap water for thinking that game developers didn't think of the majority of televisions when developing games. You should burn them under your sink until they turn dark red and fall off. Also you have down syndrome.
>>2897358
He's wrong, but you're mentally ill.
>>2897374
(Good) (one)
>>2896186
>Hint, nobody in this thread knows 'what the devs intended'.
Well we know what some intended because they've said it themselves.
>>2896186
Do you just lack any common sense at all, dick sucker?
Well, there are instances where developers use the blurriness of imperfect signals to their advantage. For instance, sonic having the dithered waterfall to give the appearance of transparency.
But for the most part, this is bullshit. The devs working on these games used RGB monitors to get proper image
>>2888162
Those aren't different things.
>>2889087
>People is so willing to fix the games themselves, developers just don't give a shit about quality games on PC
Yes but they're so willing to fix the games themselves because the developers just don't give a shit about quality of games on the PC anymore. Why not fix the game if you paid for it and it can be improved?
>>2888163
Good post
>>2897358
This is just assumptions you're making.
Because a dev made a console game doesn't necessarly mean he took into consideration the specifics of the display system, especially when there are many display systems and 2 are not alike.
It's a base by case basics. For instance, in some games, a round circle will only appear round if apply the small stretching of a CRT screen. In some others, it will appear round if you don't.
Case by case basis. It is wrong to claim that "video games in general were built with the specifics of CRT tvs in mind".
>>2898806
some people in this thread get it
>>2889471
It's not even a screen mode, It's from a lousy powerup that you can only get from one of those 8-bit Mario amiibos. It makes mario slightly bigger and makes enemies look strange.
>>2881531
Eat shit and die
>>2899091
Yet people like OP still insists it's "indie" developers that make their retro style games look pixelated. It's not just "indie" developers. It's every developer. The tiny handful of people in this thread are among the last on earth who care about or like the way games look displayed on CRTs.
>>2899310
>The tiny handful of people in this thread are among the last on earth who care about or like the way games look displayed on CRTs.
I love the way games look displayed on a CRT. Except when I mean "CRT" I mean awesome high-end PC monitor CRTs, not blurry shit-tier TVs. Good CRTs can show sharp pixels, and you get perfect low latency and low persistence for free.
