Is there a way out yet to possibly use plug-ins to make SNES emulators have better graphics or maybe HD roms that are out? I love my SNES games, but would like to see some round edges.
>>3201091
sure kiddo just turn on them beautiful "HD" filters in snes9x
>>3201120
I don't use that emulator.
I saw that the n64 emulators had an option for HD graphics plug-ins, so I tried them for OoT. I saw zero difference.
>>3201091
Play the games on real hardware and a CRT TV. They'll look 10x better than on emulators.
>>3201091
>>3201148
All right, OP. If you're serious about this, you need to learn the difference between a bitmap and a polygon.
A bitmap is what the NES, SNES, and other sprite-based consoles use. It's an image made up of predefined pixels. Because the "inbetween" values of these pixels can't be calculated accurately by a computer, the highest possible resolution they can be played at without looking pixelated is what you already see (unless you use an awful filter like >>3201120 that just guesses what those in-between pixels should be). The only thing you can do to make it "HD" is to remake the sprite entirely, generally on more powerful hardware as systems like the SNES were built to run at tiny resolutions.
A polygon is an object in a 3D game that can be manipulated and viewed as if it were a real-life object. This kind of object only exists as points in a simulated 3D space - the computer has to calculate what each pixel of the polygon should look like every time a new frame is displayed. Because of this, a polygon can be viewed at a higher resolution and not become blocky like sprites. However, like sprites, the texture (a 2D image that is applied to the polygon to make it look distinct, such as grass or floor paneling) will become more pixellated when the resolution is increased, because it too is a bitmap. Again, there's nothing you can do about it other than remake the textures at a higher quality.
Does that make more sense?
>>3201168
Kek
Way back in the day here on /vr/ there used to be a comic that would get posted where a father and son were walking around in the first stage of Sonic and the dad was reminiscing. He spoke with Russian style grammar "Why everything is so blurry?" "Is as developers intended" I've been trying to find a copy of that image for months with no success does someone have it?
>>3201254
we need more vr comics
>>3201103
You're "genuinely curious" but never thought to check google for 10 seconds before making a thread?
There's HDNes for the NES and HiSMS for the Master System. Nothing for the Super NES yet.
http://forums.nesdev.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=9935
http://hisms.orgfree.com/
>>3201279
Yeah. "Genuinely curious" not "performing an in depth investigation for a paper I'm writing".
I figured you guys would know best, instead of some 10 year old emulator forum where tards masturbate over Donkey Kong Country roms
Video games should be played on small displays.
>>3201345
>I figured you guys would know best, instead of some 10 year old emulator forum where tards masturbate over Donkey Kong Country roms
Well you've very obviously never been to /vr/. We're way worse than that.
>>3201345
We do know best.
What's best is not to use blobby smoothing filters there's literally no one on /vr/ who will fail to ridicule you for doing that.
If you want to use a good filter have a look at crt_geom. It requires some serious ass processing power and a very high resolution output.
If you can't run that, then go for whatever your maximum horizontal resolution is with a 480 vertical resolution at 60hz with or without artificial "scanlines" depending on your display and personal preference
The cheapest and easiest way to get properly rounded edges is by actually using a CRT. You could haul your old vga CRT out of storage and push a 640x480x60 signal to it with artificial scanlines or you could actually get an sd crt tv and go the extra mile to output a signal it will recognize. The Wii is a popular device to do this with as it's easy to mod and has a flexible enough video chip that several emulators support console-native output.
>>3201385
Not him, but the only thing more lame than blob filters are CRT ones.
>>3201396
While I agree where most simple crt filters used on non-crt displays are concerned crt_geom really is impressive with how accurately it replicates bloom. Bloom is the secret to the pleasantly rounded edges people remember retro games having when they were kids. Actual CRTs have such intense brightness that it "blooms" outward when your eye sees it.
Another option to not see the jagged edges when emulating is just to sit farther from your screen or put it in a small native resolution window and just let your eyes do the blurring for you.
>>3201416
>crt_geom really is impressive with how accurately it replicates bloom.
That's why I think it's so ugly. I think bloom looks disgusting. But, to each their own. Everyone has different taste.
>>3201420
So then you think actual retro games played on entirely authentic period hardware look disgusting?
>>3201424
I think they look better on screens other than CRTs, yes. I've had this discussion before here too many times. Yes I grew up with CRTs and I never liked the way they look. Especially the bloom.
If people want to run filters when emulating to make the games look more like they're running on a CRT then that's perfectly fine for them. But I think it looks terrible.
Like I say, to each their own. But opinions vary.
>>3201120
>Ayy muh HD
TBQH, SENPAI. SuperSai2X is superior pixel filter.
>>3201385
Tried that. CRT fags mocked me, marked my posts for shitposting, then janny banned me for a week. All because my CRT is not a PVM or 32 inch sonyshit.
>>3201168
Bretty guds. Where download?
>>3201091
this has to be b8
>>3201571
>ITT tall tales
By that logic I would have been banned many, many times.
>>3201207
good post. I'd just like to add a few notes: You said correctly that filters for raster graphics have to "guess" the values between the grid. There are many ways to guess, all with their various pros and cons. The nearest neighbor filter is one of these many guesses. People tend to think of it as unfiltered, but it's no different from a bilinear or HQ filter in that regard.
Now, back to the polygon: You correctly said that with polygons it's easier to determine the in-between pixels. It's all straight vector math.
I'd dare offer a slightly different perspective though: With raster graphics you interpolate pixels that haven't been there. With polygons the equivalent is not a higher resolution, but guessing the shape that isn't there, as the primitive is not the pixel but the polygon. Mechanisms like tesselation. The most simple guess is that the missing vertices would lie right on the surface of the polygon. You can optimize those away and what's left is the original polygon itself. You could go a different way though, using the normals at the vertices to interpolate a suggested curve.
These kinds of filters are about as "succcessful" as guessing filters on raster graphics. They, just like HQ filters for rasters, can do sophisticated guesses on what polygons represent sharp creases, and what represent smooth surfaces, so they can retain the creases and smooth the surfaces. The raster-equivalent would be edge and curve detection, and smoothing these curves while retaining edge contrasts.
>>3201616
What about vector graphics? Less the ones with a special vector display like the Vectrex or arcade games like Asteroids or Tempest and more those displayed on raster monitors such as old adventure games.
>>3201776
depends on the engine. If you have control over the engine, access to the underlying polygons, you can go high resolution and try curve interpolation. If all that is just internal, and the only thing you get is the raster screen they're rendered to, then it's raster graphics. In most cases you will not have access to the guts of the engine
>>3201091
>there are still people who don't use nearest neighbour with integer scaling
what the world come to
>>3201813
It's still correct. Lrn 2 grammar.
>>3201616
i dont think that anon meant adding poygons
but a humanoid made of 100 triangles can be scaled to ur tv hi res making edges smoother even not taking into account antialiasing that could be absent or moderated on the original release
>>3201884
correct, anon was talking about changing the render target resolution, which is what a lot of emulators do, and perfectly valid.
However, it masks a bit what the problem with increasing the resolution of raster graphics is, and glosses over what increasing the render target resolution does conceptually. When you increase the resolution, you silently assume that all edges in the polygons were meant to be straight in the original high detail data the game models are derived from. Especially with curves though, that's not the case. And it's actually a bit of a problem when increasing the resolution. On quite a few old games, especially PS and N64, one motivation for the polygon count of certain models is that it's "good enough" at the resolution. You can not see the sharp kinks in the models, because they're rendered with a too low resolution. Increase the render resolution, and suddenly that polygonal nature is far more obvious.
Sure, you can say the one on the right looks better, high resolution and all that, but at the same time, you can clearly see the blockiness of the character on the right, the shorts are pyramids, the gauntlets are sharp enough, you could cut yourself. These models were made for the resolution on the left, where, pixelation aside, they look like a fairly natural shape. And while it's trivial to increase the raster resolution of the output, it's far from trivial to increase the details of the model. Filtering is the raster graphics equivalent of doing the latter.
So, in a way you could say, at high resolution raster images pixelate, and polygons expose their bumpy curves. HQ filters try to address the former, something like Truform tries to address the latter.
>a humanoid made of 100 triangles
just a note on the side: original Lara Croft had around 300 tris. You won't get very far with 100 tris.
>>3201091
if you want things to look less pixelated then use a CRT, preferably RGB.
>>3201970
you've posted the only reason to play snes final fight
>>3201970
>there are people who think this looks good.
>>3201983
I like how CRTs look for retro games but I do not understand the scanline fetish.
>>3201168
>filters
Cancer.
It looks like shit.
>>3201091
No.
>>3201276
This is pretty funny, if anyone has more, make a thread please
>>3201983
It's a close up photo. It doesn't actually look like that unless you put your face up to the screen.
>>3202095
and I tried to expand a bit on it for readers interested in the subject, sorry
>>3201168
>HD texture pack
So true, so much unbalanced packs out there...
>>3201091
Kill yourself.
