/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1654413]

Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?

With the ever increasing resolution of modern monitors, playing without filters is going to be less and less feasible.

But with the increasing processing power, doesn't the more modern and sophisticated filter/scaling filters and algorithms make a very decent job?

[Anonymous No.1654415]

>>1654413
what the fuck do you mean less feasible
it never stops being so
jesus fuck

[Anonymous No.1654416]

>playing without filters is going to be less and less feasible

captcha: aneues David

[Anonymous No.1654417]

>>1654413
never
>le_yoshi_filtered_face.jpg !

[Anonymous No.1654418]

>>1654415
You either play at native resolution, but because the monitor's resolution goes up, things get smaller and smaller till the point you get see anything.

Or you just scale without a filter, at which point you'll get a huge square as the hand of a character.

That's what I mean by getting less and less feasible — the increase in monitor resolution demands the use of scaling filters.

[Anonymous No.1654426]

>>1654413
>playing without filters is going to be less and less feasible
Pixel art is designed to look good with visible pixels. You can see individual pixels with a good CRT and RGB connection. They are especially clear in mode 13h and mode X DOS games, which are line-doubled, but use the exact same art techniques as used for 240p displays. The only filter required is something like the pixelate shader for correcting aspect ratios for non-1:1 pixel aspect systems.

[Anonymous No.1654434]

>>1654418

man I've been scaling emulators for years and it looks delicious. as long as you maintain aspect ratio and don't hunch over the screen like a mongoloid it's all good. filters look ok in example screen shots but for the most part they look like turducken ass farts in actual play

[Anonymous No.1654443]

>>1654413
As far as I'm aware, a lot of people on /vr/ likes scanlines. I have to agree that they work quite well. No need for heavy scanlines, soft ones will do.

That way you don't mess with blurring shit and don't get a clump of glued pixels.

[Anonymous No.1654474]

When I find a game that looks good with filters.
The closest I ever found was the Boktai Series with filters. And even then I changed it back to normal.

[Anonymous No.1654480]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?
no because /vr/ is not a hivemind

[Anonymous No.1654485]

the best filter is filtering CRT and filter threads

[Anonymous No.1654490]

/vr/ is not one person
Some people like filters
Some people don't

I don't give a fuck either way because I care about gameplay and what you decide to do when you emulate does not have any effect on me whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.1654493]

As a thumbnail those filters are alright. Actual size they look awful. 2x scanlines and interpolation is alright. I definitely wouldn't go higher. Anti-aliasing always gets turned off.

[Anonymous No.1654728]

I don't care if anyone wants to use filters, but these threads always turn into an excuse for RetroArch devs to spam the shit out of /vr/. There's no point in starting this up again, because it's just going to end up with a ton of RA devs shitposting at everybody who doesn't want to use their shitty frontend software.

[Anonymous No.1654779]

>>1654728
Wild conspiracy theories much?

[Anonymous No.1654786]

>>1654728

lol wut?

[Anonymous No.1654792]

xBRZ is best filter

[Anonymous No.1654793]

>>1654480
>>1654490
This.

>>1654728
You're the first person to mention RetroArch in this thread... Ever consider the possibility that you might be part of the problem?

[Anonymous No.1654804]

I use 100% scanlines, Gaussian blur, and a gamma ramp on a 480p CRT monitor.

[Anonymous No.1654856]

>>1654413
>With the ever increasing resolution of modern monitors, playing without filters is going to be less and less feasible
If someone really wanted to see pixels without any filters, wouldn't they be do integer scaling with nearest neighbor or whatever?
How does what you're talking about affect that? Do you think increasing resolution is the same as increasing the size of a monitor?

[Anonymous No.1654869]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?
No, because you'd have to be stupid to stick to a single filter. I usually change the filter depending on the game I play so it looks the best.

It's as simple as this.

[Anonymous No.1654873]

Filters will always be shit by definition.

>>1654728
This here too.

[Anonymous No.1654878]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?
the one that filters out shit threads

[Anonymous No.1654879]

Anyone here use cgwg-CRT-v5? Is there a way to lessen the warp just a bit, but not disable it?

Also if I could ease up the scanlines just a tad that'd be nice too.

[Anonymous No.1654885]

>>1654873
>Filters will always be shit by definition.

Explain. The purism surrounding nearest neighbor filtering is kind of silly to be honest.

[Anonymous No.1654887]

>>1654413
I just use a simple 2x when I play on some emulators, but most of the time I don't mind original resolution.

[Anonymous No.1654889]

>>1654413
>With the ever increasing resolution of modern monitors, playing without filters is going to be less and less feasible.
No?
Increasing resolution doesn't matter, at all. If you're using nearest neighbor it doesn't mean two shits how much you increase the resolution. No ones playing 240p on their LCD monitors directly. Either you're using 240p with a hardware scaler or on a display that actually handles it and increasing resolution is irrelevant to you.

Also there are some filters that are good.

>>1654879
>Is there a way to lessen the warp just a bit, but not disable it?
Yeah, find the portion of the code that warps it and change the numbers that reflect the amount in the appropriate manner.

[Anonymous No.1654893]

>>1654879
IIRC CRT-Geom doesn't have easily adjustable scanlines and involves making the scanlines bloom more.

[Anonymous No.1654897]

>>1654893
I sorta figured what with the RGB cells and all... Guess I'll just try to hammer it out.

[Anonymous No.1654902]

>>1654879
Using deduction and reasoning I've figured out a possible section of the code that would reduce the distortion. It took some time to identify the code that but I think I got it. You really need to be very clever to see how they handled this.

[Anonymous No.1654908]

>>1654902
Thanks dickhead. You're a super guy.

I hadn't bothered opening the file, when I did I saw this immediately. Doesn't help with the scanlines.

[Anonymous No.1654909]

I use filters that remove dithering for Genesis and some SNES games.
There's ugly or distracting false positives at times, but overall I think it looks better.

Will it ever be possible to have filters applied individually to various layers (background, foreground, sprite, etc.), rather than to the final image?

[Anonymous No.1654912]

>>1654902
You should rub highliters on your screen, some of them are permanent.

[Anonymous No.1654924]

>>1654885
"Nearest neighbor" integer scaling does not alter anything, it expands an image to look exactly the same as it does at the original resolution. Filters do not. At best they are a highly speculative guess at what the original artists -might- want the image to look like, at worst they are a complete and utter mangling of good art.

[Anonymous No.1654925]

[Anonymous No.1654934]

>>1654925
Is it that time already?

[Anonymous No.1654936]

>>1654934

Yes, it is.

[Anonymous No.1654937]

>>1654908
>I hadn't bothered opening the file, when I did I saw this immediately. Doesn't help with the scanlines.

[Anonymous No.1654942]

>>1654936

[Anonymous No.1654943]

>>1654908

[Anonymous No.1654946]

I'd love curved crtglow_gauss

[Anonymous No.1654947]

>>1654925
>>1654934
>>1654936
>>1654942

>muh strawman images

[Anonymous No.1654949]

>>1654925
epic, simply epic!

Anyways, I'm convinced that any OP concerning filters or emulation is bait. Everyone should know by now how touchy /vr/ can be about the subject, and how quickly discussion devolves into "x emulator is shit, why don't you use the objectively better y emulator" faggotry which is shortly followed by "stfu y emulator shill".

[Anonymous No.1654951]

>>1654937
Actually nix that, that increases the 'intensity' that one. It blooms shit.

[Anonymous No.1654954]

>>1654947
Second and fourth guy you quoted here.
I use filters, these images just make me laugh.

[Anonymous No.1654958]

>>1654924
None of these old games had good art, they were limited by small resolution, so you might as well filter them and make them look better than they originally were. The whole "pixel art" thing comes from the hipster indie game fad of thinking blocky graphics = good graphics.

[Anonymous No.1654961]

>>1654924
Nearest neighbor distorts the image if used at non-integer ratios, and non-integer ratios are required for NES/SNES/NeoGeo/etc. because of the non-1:1 pixel aspect. Therefore some additional post-filtering is required (preserving as much sharpness as possible).

[Anonymous No.1654963]

>>1654958
"Indie" pixel art is almost always shit, but it's a valid artform and there's some truly great pixel art out there. You might as well say movies can't be good art because they're all limited by low framerate.

[Anonymous No.1654964]

>>1654947
how is that strawman, those are screenshots of actual filters you fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.1654965]

>>1654947

But now the game is way better than the original.

[Anonymous No.1654967]

>>1654958
Wait, you don't see how good art was a pretty huge deal in marketing? Hell, it still is.

[Anonymous No.1654976]

Thing about filters is that they are inconsistent as hell.
In the same picture you have some parts looking vectorized, some looking pixelated, some looking super smooth and better shaded, some looking just plain fat and disfigured and so on.

Snes9x 1.52 has a really convincing RGB/Composite filter, I think that while playing on a window is ideal, or just no filters + window mode.

[Anonymous No.1654978]

That dolphin's face will never stop being hilarious to me.

[Anonymous No.1654982]

>>1654964
Closeup shots of sprites make everything look

[Anonymous No.1654993]

>>1654908
If you lower the value I highlighted in that image it'll bloom and get brighter, you can offset the return value (.51) to offset that brightness a bit.

[Anonymous No.1655003]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?
Yes, a filter that properly simulates a decent (but not too high-res) CRT picture on an LCD screen.

[Anonymous No.1655007]

>>1654964
Second and fourth guy he quoted here.
Those are Super Eagle / 2xSaI / hq3x / whatever garbage that most people (I hope) realize are pretty fucking terrible. It isn't accurate to say all filters look like that.
That said, Yoshi's Island is THE game that morons point to to say that sometimes the aforementioned filters can look great, so, ehhh...

>>1654982
>implying the point is the scale of the images and not the numerous inaccuracies caused by false positives as well as the awkward mix of blockiness and vectorization
No anon. You are the strawmen.

[Anonymous No.1655009]

>>1654415
OP is right, while you're ignorant.

Filters are butt-ugly, but, as resolutions increase, upscaling also looks increasingly ugly.

[Anonymous No.1655019]

>>1654993
Thanks. This is a little closer to what I was looking for. I'll keep playing with it.

[Anonymous No.1655021]

>>1655007
>numerous inaccuracies

So its "muh accuracy" again. byuu's mental insanity seems to have spread even into filters

[Anonymous No.1655023]

>>1654993
forgot pic

[Anonymous No.1655026]

This is the best one.

[Anonymous No.1655036]

>>1655021
Does >>1654954 look accurate to you?
If your answer is "yes, that looks perfectly accurate", then I suggest a visit to your local optometrist at your earliest convenience, assuming you can even read this text, that is.

[Anonymous No.1655042]

>>1654963
>You might as well say movies can't be good art because they're all limited by low framerate.

That opinion wouldn't surprise me on /vr/ at all.

[Anonymous No.1655053]

[Anonymous No.1655054]

>>1655036
Mah accuracy!
So many Byuu´s Witnesses in here.
I hope you have fun, carring your desktop pc to play some old games in the higan emulator.
I will have fun on my shitty cel phone

[Anonymous No.1655059]

>>1655009
But the exact opposite is true. Upscaling looks worse at lower resolutions where it's less likely you'll have an integer scale that fills or nearly fills the screen, and the effects of non-integer scaling are much more pronounced (pic related).

[Anonymous No.1655069]

>>1655036
No less accurate than "pixel perfect" nearest neighbor. All upscaling is inaccurate.

[Anonymous No.1655071]

>>1655054
Cute.

[Anonymous No.1655089]

>>1654873
>Filters will always be shit by definition.

[Anonymous No.1655094]

>>1654965
That one actually looks pretty good.

[Anonymous No.1655095]

>>1655089
Would be better without the scanlines.

[Anonymous No.1655097]

>>1655059
You can smooth out non-integer scalling pretty easily. Now sure, it's slightly noticeable, but only at low resolution. At high resolution, you can't possibly see the difference.

Which I think is the point this anon was trying to make.

[Anonymous No.1655106]

>>1654418
There's nothing wrong with scaling without a filter and you're autistic.

That said, the color filter to compensate for the lack of backlight on Pre-DS Nintendo handhelds is pretty good looking sometimes.

[Anonymous No.1655125]

>>1654418
Stop talking in terms of resolution, the resolution is the number of pixels per inch.

What you're talking about is the dimension. And yes, screens get larger and larger, but then you don't have to make the graphics cover the entire screen.

[Anonymous No.1655126]

>>1654418
>Or you just scale without a filter, at which point you'll get a huge square as the hand of a character.
That's not a question of resolution, it's a question of screen size and viewing distance.

[Anonymous No.1655207]

>>1655125
>Stop talking in terms of resolution, the resolution is the number of pixels per inch.
That's DPI, not resolution.

>What you're talking about is the dimension.
Dimension and resolution are the same thing.

[Anonymous No.1655231]

>>1655207
In internet talk, you're right. In the real world, you're wrong.

The pixel to inch ratio is the resolution.
The size of a display in inches is the dimension.
The size of a display in pixels is the definition.

What you are referring to is the definition inherited from CRT screens, which doesn't apply to LCD screens.

Still, you're confusing things. Scaling isn't a problem, even if you have double the definition, as long as the dimensions remain the same, you won't see the difference. So yeah, as of today, 720p on a 20" 720p screen is the same thing as 720p on a 20" 1080p screen.

[Anonymous No.1655252]

The CRT with halation filter in Retroarch is nice, as is PhosphorLUT.

Otherwise integer scaling is just fine.

[Anonymous No.1655773]

240p Test Suite checkerboard pattern, scaled to 1080p with non-integer scaling

Nearest Neighbor

[Anonymous No.1655778]

>>1655773

Bilinear

[Anonymous No.1655783]

>>1654936

[Anonymous No.1655784]

>>1655778

Bilinear with a 2x Nearest prescale

[Anonymous No.1655790]

>>1655784

Bilinear with a 4x Nearest prescale

[Anonymous No.1655804]

Does anyone know of a filter that mimics the Gameboy filter, but allows color? It's the perfect filter for Gameboy and Gameboy Color, but I can't play Pogeymanz in monochrome.

[Anonymous No.1655835]

[Anonymous No.1655836]

>>1654493

Same here.

25% Scanline and Interpolation Master Race.

[Anonymous No.1655878]

>>1655835

[Anonymous No.1655924]

CRT Geom is by far the best general-purpose filter when configured properly; failing that, bilinear is usually acceptable. Smoothing filters usually remove too much detail.

Also, only massive faggots filter id textures.

[Anonymous No.1655939]

>>1655878
>how to troll /vr/.jpg

[Anonymous No.1655962]

>autismals getting angry at people using filters
every time. I cannot even imagine the wizardry level.

[Anonymous No.1655996]

>>1654413
I personally use Scale4x, it's iffy on shading but looks amazing on text.

[Anonymous No.1656080]

Being complete serious here btw:

The perfect filter will be a multi pass with several stages.

The goal here I'm assuming is to get a filter that produces higher resolution sprites without any noticeable detail distortion.

This is difficult with existing HQx4, supersai etc. as the edge distortion creates all this ugly vector art crap that detracts away from the "intended" level of detail

In my experience a nice biliniar filter can double or even triple the resolution by creating extra pixels and this, to me is ideal and produces a similar effect to scan lines.

So in conclusion

First pass: create more pixels to work with using a bilinear filter

Second pass:If you have read this far I applaud you but I got nothing. Perhaps something that can calculate larger curves based on an alogarithm so groups of color are more natural.

Third stage: Smooth out the newly created detail with a Hq4x whatever filter that dont let the lines go in weird directions or create odd edges.

[disability-anon No.1656092]

Why even use filters? why not play it on the actual hardware on a Crt? Just curious. At least you get the results you want that way.

[Anonymous No.1656112]

I just use filters depending on whether it makes the game look better or not. I don't use them with games like Super Metroid, for example, because in my opinion, it can stand alone on it's own. Scanlines when I'm playing on my TV, yeah, but otherwise it doesn't matter. Kirby looks alright with or without a smoother, so I just play it based on whim and whether I'm playing with family or not (because playing Kirby Superstar is a family thing for us)

[Anonymous No.1656114]

>>1656092
Because not everyone wants to get the genuine experience when they play retro games, which isn't wrong. Some people don't want to go hunting down genuine hardware just to play games they can emulate for free, or get an ancient television just to do it. I'd personally LIKE to be able to do that, but while I do have the money to do it, I simply don't have the SPACE for it.

Also, because my Gameboy can't plug into a CRT.

Different strokes for different strokes, brudda.

[Anonymous No.1656159]

>>1655878
Holy SHIT your hands are fucking tiny

[Anonymous No.1656198]

>>1655089
I'll take the left one. Keep your eyes peeled!

[Anonymous No.1656235]

>>1655878
>LCD
>hq shader
>360 controller
>wireless
>analog stick in fucking SMW

Not even mad. I'm impressed.
6/10
Could have used an incorrect aspect ratio.

[Anonymous No.1656339]

>>1655878
>Fucking filter
>Controlling the game with the goddamn Analog stick at all things
>Not holding the run button

[Anonymous No.1656364]

I will never understand why people use filters.

[Anonymous No.1656395]

>>1656364
I use filters because it gives some games something like a hand-drawn feel. Yoshi's Island and Earthbound take it quite well.

Hate me if you must.

[Anonymous No.1656403]

>>1656395

[Anonymous No.1656413]

>>1656235
>>1655878
>>1656339
360 analog stick is superior the shitty d-pad even for 2D games. The d-pad is nearly non-functional. It's trash.

[Anonymous No.1656437]

>>1656413
While I agree that the dpad is trash, you can get a better controller for a fraction of the price.
I'm willing to bet most people on /vr/ own a Super Nintendo controller. Adapters are plentiful, and most notable introduce no perceivable input lag.

Or you could pick up one of those Buffalo USB SNES controllers for like $12 on Amazon. Only difference from the real deal is that the dpad is a bit stiffer, but it's still a quality pad.

[Anonymous No.1656487]

>>1655069
Integer ratio nearest neighbor is not upscaling, it's literally changing the size of the pixels. There is no standard for number of subpixels per pixel, and integer ratio nearest neighbor could be implemented in the display hardware. Therefore it's indistinguishable from changing the native resolution.

[Anonymous No.1656562]

>>1654413
>filter
>good

[Anonymous No.1656575]

>>1656487
Even when I scale with different integers for the x and y axis?

[Anonymous No.1656581]

This is what a game looks like when you don't use filters. You nerds really need to get a fucking life and realize that filters make the game look better.

[Anonymous No.1656582]

>>1656080
What filter is used in that pic? Never seen SM look so good

[Anonymous No.1656589]

>>1656581
I forgot the scanlines. Does this actually look better to you stupid nerds?

[Anonymous No.1656591]

>>1656575
So long as it's integer ratio for both it's no more filtering than adjusting the width/height on a CRT.

[Anonymous No.1656630]

>>1656589
It's the way the developers intended it to be played.

[Anonymous No.1656684]

>>1656080
why is Mother Brain bathing in piss?

[Anonymous No.1656715]

>There are people on /vr/ who play Doom with any form of filtering

[Anonymous No.1656904]

>>1656487
>Integer ratio nearest neighbor is not upscaling

It is. You're scaling up an image to a larger resolution.

>it's literally changing the size of the pixels. There is no standard for number of subpixels per pixel.

Oh lord not this shit again. That's just the effect of using nearest neighbor for upscaling instead of something else. And yes there is a standard number subpixels for 99% of displays: Red, Green, and Blue. A subpixel is just a color that makes up a pixel.

[Anonymous No.1656910]

>>1656487
Integer scale is inaccurate for many consoles that were meant to be displayed 4:3 but had a different aspect ratio when you assume square pixels by integer scaling.

[Anonymous No.1656913]

No. Also, fuck you if you play retro games with an LCD.

[Anonymous No.1656928]

>>1656910
You can fix that with the right integers and a high definition monitor. Scale the x axis by 7 and the y axis by 6 for 256x224 to get 4:3.
For 320x200 scale x by 5 and y by 6.

[Anonymous No.1656945]

>>1656684
>not bathing in piss
Can you really be this much pleb?

[Anonymous No.1657091]

>>1655089
I see this image posted every damn time.

I know that, with high resolutions, you can create color in a composite signal using those kind of vertical bars, but that barely pertains to the kind of filters we talk about in this thread.

This comparison is basically meaningless.

[Anonymous No.1657459]

>>1657091
except its not because it looks glorious. I wish there was a comparable filter just like that for every system.

[Anonymous No.1657506]

>>1657459

But muh raw sprites which were never meant to be visible anyway

[Anonymous No.1657915]

Lanczos is the only shader you should use. It's like bilinear, but much, MUCH more sharper.

It isn't perfect, but in a world where you either have extremely pixelated nearest neighbor scaling or blurry as fuck bilinear filtering, Lanczos offers you a superb middle ground.

[Anonymous No.1657946]

>>1657915
I use Lanczos for my video playback but I like pixelated look for pixel art games.

[Anonymous No.1657957]

>>1657946
for me, theres a point where an older game gets TOO pixelated to the point where it's not what I remembered it to be/not what it's intended to look like.

[Anonymous No.1657962]

>>1657946
game developers never really intended their games to look pixelated though. because of the technology at the time, those games were actually fairly smooth and sharp back in the day, but now because of LCD monitors at high resolutions, they look pixelated.

[Anonymous No.1657985]

>>1657962
I said I like them that way. I'm not trying to live in the past or pretend that I'm doing god's own work.
Early NES box art was very blocky so it's not like the aesthetic didn't have fans back in the day. Some developers would do the initial graphics on graph paper before converting them for the computer.

[Anonymous No.1657997]

>>1654413
I was under the impression that most people against the use of filters, myself included, were those in favor of keeping the authentic graphics in tact.
>inb4 seeking authenticity with emulators
I understand that emulators are by definition, not authentic. However, emulators practically remove everything I didn't like about the consoles as well. I personally love most older games graphics, so of course I want to keep them the way they are behind my CRT, but the controls in some games, hammering cartridges into the console, browsing through piles of difficult to manage by alphabet games, hunting for difficult to acquire games, paying out the ass for flash carts, et cetera.. yeah I just don't miss that shit.

Also, most people, and this is just an assumption, who like the original graphics, will continue to play on their CRT televisions/monitors, and there will most likely not be very much, if any, of a size difference with those over the years, so there is no real need for filters.

[Anonymous No.1658003]

>>1657985
I'm more so referring to SNES/PS1 games. For NES, ya no filter is the way to go.

[Anonymous No.1658010]

>>1657997
bilinear filtering keeps the graphics in tact, it just smooths out the edges. bilinear filtering is by far the most common filter. in fact, even official emulators take advantage of it.

[Anonymous No.1658016]

>>1658003
I wouldn't typically consider PS1 games as pixel art.
If something was created as a wholesome imag there's no reason to exaggerate the low resolution nature of the system.

[Anonymous No.1658020]

I'm fine with pixelation except when there is text. pixelated text looks absolutely horrendous to me.

[Anonymous No.1658028]

>>1658020
Is there a plugin that uses a vectorizing scaler for text or otherwise allows to render text at higher resolutions?

[Anonymous No.1658029]

>>1658028
I don't think there is anything intelligent enough to be able to pick out text and render it completely separate from the rest of the game.

[Anonymous No.1658037]

>>1658029
If something like AGTH can translate text on the fly I don't see why.

[Anonymous No.1658038]

Can't wait for shadow mask filters. Shame they are so far away.

[Anonymous No.1658040]

>>1658037

It can't. It just grabs the scrips from the game.

[Anonymous No.1658041]

>>1658037
You can't compare VNs to emulated SNES games in this case.

Maybe it's just all over your head, but I honestly can't think how anyone would be able to program what you are asking.

[Anonymous No.1658042]

>>1658041
I was thinking more of PS1 with HLE like PCSX-R that can also render 3D at higher resolutions.

[Anonymous No.1658051]

>>1655207

When the resolution goes up, but the screen stays the same size, the pixels get smaller, but then you scale up the image so that it looks the same as it would have on a lower resolution screen of the same size.

Like this guy said
>>1655126
It's a matter of screen size and viewing distance

[Anonymous No.1658140]

Science says Lanczos is the best as far as what's available on retroarch.

[Anonymous No.1658303]

>>1656715
Holy shit I hate those OpenGL sprite filters. Can't for the life of me understand why anyone recommends GZDoom over normal ZDoom when that's one of the few features it even has over it.

[Anonymous No.1658570]

Horizontal blur is the best filter for use on a CRT. With 100% scanlines too if you're displaying at 480p

[Anonymous No.1658719]

>>1654413
What does Metal Slug look like with 4xBRZ?

[Anonymous No.1658723]

>>1658303
You can disable the bilinear filtering in gzdoom

[Anonymous No.1658728]

>>1658719
like shit

[Anonymous No.1658818]

>>1656581
>>1656589
reported

[Anonymous No.1658840]

> filters
> not just playing every game on x2 (or x3) nearest neighbour

why

[Anonymous No.1658919]

>>1658840
because it looks like shit

[Anonymous No.1658942]

>>1656437
I play emulators with my Dualshock 4 (PS4 controller) and the dpad is pretty much fucking perfect. Sony nailed it.

[Anonymous No.1658973]

>>1658919
>filters
>not shit

[Anonymous No.1658975]

>>1654413
>giving a shit about what /vr/ thinks of your filters
Why don't you just stop being an insecure little shit?

[Anonymous No.1658992]

>>1658818
>reported
Can you not take a joke you loser? Back to Reddit with you faggot.

[Anonymous No.1659009]

>>1656112
>I just use filters depending on whether it makes the game look better or not.
So, all the time. Raw only looks good on pong.

[Anonymous No.1659013]

>using filters
Why do you play video games if you don't actually like them?

[Anonymous No.1659039]

>>1659013
>thinks improving nearest neighbor scaling is not liking a game

[Anonymous No.1659106]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?

Blargg's NTSC filter. I think that's about it really

[Anonymous No.1659201]

>>1654413
Who gives a shit what /vr/ thinks? Just use the fucking filters you like and think looks good and stop caring what some neckbeard on 4chan thinks.

[Anonymous No.1659260]

>>1659013
Awesome logic right there. I bet you never played old games on a CRT.

[Anonymous No.1659316]

>>1659260

The devs already showed you how the games were supposed to look like on the boxes. See any blurshit there?

[Anonymous No.1659323]

>>1659316

A box is not a game.

[Anonymous No.1659373]

[Anonymous No.1659538]

>>1659323
Your mom is not a game

[Anonymous No.1660004]

>>1659373
>implying the GameSphere isn't fun.

[Anonymous No.1660009]

>>1659316
Oh, like those 'speed' lines underneath?

[Anonymous No.1660015]

>>1655783
fixed

[Anonymous No.1660076]

[Anonymous No.1660108]

>>1660076

[Anonymous No.1660356]

>>1660108
>not getting the joke

[Anonymous No.1660378]

>>1657997
>against the use of filters, myself included, were those in favor of keeping the authentic graphics in tact.
You can't be against filters and for authentic graphics. Those are two opposing sides. The only way that makes sense if someone's sticking hardware based filters between actual hardware. Raw is the opposite of authentic, it's as bad as HQ4X. Effectively zero people played the system raw. Not all filters are good but all non filters are bad.

[Anonymous No.1660562]

>>1660378
Correct

[Anonymous No.1660725]

>>1660378

I'm pretty sure those people are all over nearest neighbor and "muh raw pixels" because of the current pseudo-retro trend fueled by 'indie game developers' making 'pixelart games'

[Anonymous No.1660735]

>>1660725
I don't understand it.
It's like no one knows what retro games are supposed to look like.
The only games that didn't use the limitations of the CRT to mask jagged visuals were on Atari and generally looked terrible.

[Anonymous No.1660736]

Here's a weird setup, bilinear texture filters + native resolution.

I like it. Also Ridge Racer 4 might have the most stylish presentation ever.

[Anonymous No.1660739]

>>1654413
Not until there's an engine mod that allows for fully redrawn graphics at a higher resolution.

[Anonymous No.1660743]

>>1660735
>It's like no one knows what retro games are supposed to look like.

There is a whole generation which came through emulation in contact with old console games.

[Anonymous No.1660782]

>>1660735
>It's like no one knows what retro games are supposed to look like.
Yeah, such as yourself. Only a few real examples exist of anything of the sort you're implying. You're incredibly deluded by nostalgia.

[Anonymous No.1660786]

>>1657997
This, I don't use filters because I like viewing the game as it was drawn.

[Anonymous No.1660835]

>>1660735
Even the Atari VCS wasn't crisp and clean. Despite the resolution being low enough that it could essentially be that, the RF out on it was pretty ratty and the signal came with plenty of noise and distortion enough to make what would be raw blurred on the edges enough. It would have looked closer to this. With variance in brightness/contrast/color depending on set.

[Anonymous No.1660841]

>>1660782
You don't understand.

[Anonymous No.1660898]

>>1658038
They exist.
The only real issue with them is that most screens aren't high res enough to properly display them. You pretty much need 8x native minimum to display it correctly.

[Anonymous No.1660918]

>>1660898
You would need each pixel to be 3x its original size, and enough room for a gap between each.

[Anonymous No.1660919]

how to use these filters?

[Anonymous No.1660923]

>>1660918
Not just.
Every pixel is represented by one RGB trio, as well as two halves of another, and it's kind of blurred over. 6x would be absolute minimum, 8x is preferable, but neither is very accurate.

[Anonymous No.1660932]

[Anonymous No.1660937]

>>1660923
Okay, so the visible pixel looks to be about 3x its size. However it bleeds half-way into other pixels on each side horizontally?

That's ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.1660956]

>>1660937
This is what would be needed WITHOUT the horizontal blur.
It's not happening any time soon.

[Anonymous No.1660991]

>>1660956
Holy shit my eyes.

[Anonymous No.1661000]

>>1660932

What CRT shader is that? I recognize the NTSC filter (or is it the shader one?) there too.

[Anonymous No.1661005]

Can someone suggest the best combination of shaders to get a good CRT visual?

[Anonymous No.1661015]

>>1660898

[Anonymous No.1661017]

>>1661015

[Anonymous No.1661031]

>>1661015
>>1661017
Those pretty much cover aperture grille and shadow mask emulation.

The issue I have with shaders of that level is, you have to sacrifice brightness for accuracy. Essentially, the higher the detail level, the less brightness you get.

[Anonymous No.1661035]

[Anonymous No.1661036]

[Anonymous No.1661042]

>>1661031

There's no aperture grille in the first shot, in fact there are no phosphors at all, just a raster scan. The second shot is the same thing but with a shadow mask overlay applied. If there was an aperture grille overlay, it would also look similarly dark but would consist of vertical lines of RGB instead of a shadow mask.

[Anonymous No.1661054]

>>1661000
It is ntsc look a like with composite filters.

[Anonymous No.1661058]

[Anonymous No.1661059]

>>1661042
Ah, okay.
Yeah, the first pic looked a lot like a blurry photo of my PVM, but I guess there are little RGB lines on the real thing.

Is there a good blur+brightness compromise for GTU+phosphor that make it a little less dark?

[Anonymous No.1661060]

Mmmm I love these filters and I don't even give a fuck about all the autistic whining over authenticity. You mad /vr/? You upset? You flustered because no one's paying attention to your pointless rants?

>b-but i'm a super cool elite hipster kid who just got into "retro gaming" and i say you can only use pixels!!

[Anonymous No.1661071]

>>1661060
This is literally some of the most generic bait I have ever read.
It's like you're not even trying.
>>>/v/

[Anonymous No.1661072]

>>1661060
What is on the right?
Post information?

[Anonymous No.1661096]

>>1661005
>plug A/V cord into TV
Done.

[Anonymous No.1661101]

>>1661060
>>b-but i'm a super cool elite hipster kid who just got into "retro gaming" and i say you can only use pixels!!

it's not about the pixels, it's about someone smearing vaseline on a lens so an old, decrepit movie star looks younger. it doesn't work

[Anonymous No.1661105]

>>1661096

Not that easy if you think displaying games scaled to 800x600 then output as 480i is "good"

[Anonymous No.1661109]

>>1661060

Oh summer...

[Anonymous No.1661118]

>>1661005

Are you talking about displaying on a real CRT?

If so, read this:

http://emulation.gametechwiki.com/index.php/Shaders_and_Filters#Shaders_on_real_CRTs

[Anonymous No.1661123]

>>1661118
No.
Playing on an LCD. I want the simulated look of a CRT.

[Anonymous No.1661136]

>>1661105
lolwut, I don't think you know how this shit works
most CRT's don't have to scale.
any LCD ever that takes in SD is probably 1024x768, not 800x600.

[Anonymous No.1661140]

>>1661123

Oh well there's several of those out there

https://github.com/libretro/common-shaders/tree/master/crt

[Anonymous No.1661156]

>>1661136

Video cards will only output badly scaled 480i from their "TV-Out" ports, if you want proper 240p output, it has to be RGB output from the VGA/DVI port.

[Anonymous No.1661169]

FILTHY FILTER SCUM

[Anonymous No.1661174]

[Anonymous No.1661178]

>>1661174
>using 16:9 over 4:3 aspect ratio
Pig disgusting.

[Anonymous No.1661192]

>>1661156
okay, I know what you're talking about now

I have a friend with a decent MAME setup with the same issue. Fun to play, but shit quality graphics.

I have my wii hooked up to a PVM, which blows his setup out of the water, but doesn't quite have the juice to emulate all the games he can.

[Anonymous No.1661635]

>>1654924
>a complete and utter mangling of good art

[Anonymous No.1661668]

>>1661635
People back then had faulty vision and the artists expected the viewers to wear glasses that blurred the stones.

[Anonymous No.1662007]

>>1661635
10/10

[Anonymous No.1662008]

[Anonymous No.1662138]

>>1654961
For NES/SNES, aren't you supposed to "stretch" output to 4:3 aspect prior to scaling anyway?

[Anonymous No.1662160]

>>1656904
>And yes there is a standard number subpixels for 99% of displays: Red, Green, and Blue.
No CRT is configured like this. You even get different numbers of subpixels per pixel at different parts of the screen.

>A subpixel is just a color that makes up a pixel.
No, that's a color channel.

[Anonymous No.1662174]

>>1657915
>Lanczos is the only shader you should use. It's like bilinear, but much, MUCH more sharper.
And it rings horribly on pixel art.

>Lanczos offers you a superb middle ground.
The middle ground of nearest and bilinear is nearest followed by bilinear. Change the nearest ratio to adjust the sharpness.

>>1657962
>game developers never really intended their games to look pixelated
VGA DOS games were line doubled, they always looked clearly pixelated.

>>1658010
>bilinear filtering keeps the graphics in tact
Bilinear filtering completely mangles the colors unless it's done in linear colorspace, which is almost never is. (this isn't a problem with nearest prescale, in that case only a small minority of pixels are actually affected by the bilinear filter so it's not noticeable)

>>1658140
Science says Lanczos is best for correctly sampled real images only, eg. photos/video.

>>1660735
The only games that didn't use the limitations of the CRT to mask jagged visuals were on Atari
And every mode 13h/mode X DOS game.

>>1662138
If you want sharpness you apply the resampling filter after the integer ratio nearest neighbor.

[Anonymous No.1662197]

This is bait

Nearest Neighbor has done me fine for a decade plus, will continue to do so for many more.

Dad seems to prefer the filters though, what a nut.

[Anonymous No.1662237]

>>1662138
You can't turn 256x224 into 4:3 with square pixes without scaling.

[Anonymous No.1662264]

I've always used nearest neighbor but I've been messing and configuring CRT-hylian a bit and I noticed it does make some difference. It makes everything less rough and better detailed while still mantaining the pixels sharp in place. I don't like sharp black scanlines over my games or NTSC blurriness or phosphor or whatever. From the distance where I play the games I can't notice much difference, but that's what I like the best.

[Anonymous No.1662292]

>>1660956
Thanks doc

[Anonymous No.1662295]

>>1662237
Sure you can, nearest neighbor 7x on x-axis, 6x on y-axis, to 1792x1344. But in practice this doesn't fit any monitor well, hence the need for pixelate shader/resampling post-filter.

[Anonymous No.1662309]

>>1658303
I remember playing with filters because i didn't know how to turn them off

[Anonymous No.1662340]

I don't mean to start a shitstorm and this doesn't have anything to do with anything but I noticed that when playing epsxe on a higher internal resolution with bilinear filtering everything tends to look more cartoony and uh, mellowed out?
But when in native the textures almost seem more gritty and serious. Also 2D objects don't seem out of place.

I still think there are instances when higher res is preffered, though, like on Megaman Legends or fighting games. Just food for thought.

[Anonymous No.1662356]

>>1662295
You may disagree whether integer nearest neighbor is filtering but it's most definitely scaling when you use a factor other than 1.
1792x1344 fits well for 2560x1440 monitors. With a 2560x1600 monitor it can still be worth the tradeoff for the smaller image.

[Anonymous No.1662383]

>>1654474
I found Kid Chameleon to look kinda alright with the filters Gens offers for use.

[Anonymous No.1662448]

>>1661058
I threw up a little.

[Anonymous No.1662524]

>>1662356
>2560x1440 monitors
The only monitor I know of that can display that with good motion quality is the FW900 (maybe there are other similar ones), and you can get a dedicated 15KHz CRT for cheaper.

[Anonymous No.1662531]

>>1662340
>I still think there are instances when higher res is preffered, though
In fully 3d games reasonably higher internal resolution is always preferred, period.

2d (including games with 2d on 3d backgrounds and vice versa) should be left unfiltered for now, though.

[Anonymous No.1662534]

>>1662524
What about 4k monitors?

[Anonymous No.1662552]

>>1662534
You're not going to get monitors with a refresh rate over 60 Hz and a resolution over 1920x1080. Technically it's only a limitation of HDMI but manufacturers don't seem interested in producing them.
1792x1344 is lost on a 3840x2160 display.

[Anonymous No.1662603]

>not just playing your retro games on a crt

[Anonymous No.1662662]

>>1661668
oh lawdy

[Anonymous No.1662863]

>>1662340
PSX and Saturn look ugly as fuck with "HD" graphics, not to mention HLE has tons of glitches and visual inaccuracies due to their 3D not being the same as what video cards use. Native resolution software rendered on a CRT is preferable for those.

[Anonymous No.1663027]

>>1661109

Fuck off with your epic /v/ memes.

[Crespone No.1663083]

>>1661058
i-is great

[Anonymous No.1663108]

>>1662603
I do play my retro games on a crt. But it's a pc monitor, and even if i wrote in my own superwide screenmodes to play games at their original resolutions, it would not look like it did on my tv or my gameboy.

[Anonymous No.1663241]

>>1663027
Summer /v/ is, unfortunately, a very real phenomenon, and it looks as though it's going to happen on /vr/ too despite its relative insulation from modern players.

[Anonymous No.1663530]

>dhalsim takes filters because of peer pressure
his life is ruined

[Anonymous No.1663546]

>>1663241
Its on all boards, friend. And I hate to break it to you, but its all part of the changing of the guard. People tire of 4chan and leave. Newfriends discover it and shitpost until they 'figure it out' or create a new norm.
Polite sage.

[Anonymous No.1663591]

testing all these filters out is kinda fun , even though probably wont even go back to retroarch

[Anonymous No.1663714]

>shaders
>good

Wait a couple of decades, mate.

[Anonymous No.1663783]

>>1662340
I will take upscaled psx any day, the only exception is 2D games or games that have too much 2D elements like FF Tactics

also this thread is full of fucking people clearly out to shitpost making stupid analogies and posting bullshots making unfiltered games look like complete crap by messing with the video settings and also using the worst and least popular filters/shaders to make everything look bad.

[Anonymous No.1663790]

>>1661060
there is only authentic and not authentic, thats why i own a crt BUT sometimes i get tired of the flickering and like to play on my LCD as well

[Anonymous No.1663797]

>>1663591
go back?

[Anonymous No.1664029]

the 16:9 filter anyone?
obviously it's still in beta and buggy as fuck but it looks promising so far

[Anonymous No.1664039]

>>1664029
How is that supposed to work?

[Anonymous No.1664061]

>>1664039
you need game-specific XML files so the emulator knows what to render out-of-bounds and where

[Anonymous No.1664084]

>>1664029
whoa, now that looks useful.

[Anonymous No.1664087]

>>1664061
What games are supported so far and are other aspect ratios like 16:10 possible as well?

[Anonymous No.1664095]

>>1664029
i'm super interested world in this filter, where can I find more info?

[Anonymous No.1664101]

>>1664095
>>1664087
>>1664084

Naw, just fuckin' with ya. It doesn't really exist – I made that shit up. Some screenshot and photoshop.

Still though, it's not impossible. Just very hard.

[Anonymous No.1664103]

>>1664101
dang, the glitchy tiles on the right border made it just authentic enough for me to believe it

[Anonymous No.1664137]

Whatever TV Mode (CVBS) is, I wish I had it for every emulator.
It blends dithering PERFECTLY for an emulator without the fake TV feel. It does it just right.

[honk No.1664157]

>>1655106
the one on the right looks like dull ass.

[Anonymous No.1664160]

>>1664137
Another example

[Anonymous No.1664162]

>>1664160

[Anonymous No.1664175]

>>1664137
Why don't you just wear thick glasses or mount a your monitor behind a transparent screen if you want a blurred image?

[Anonymous No.1664184]

>>1664175
What?

[Anonymous No.1664192]

>>1664184
That filter just blurs the image to hell. You can get the same effect with glass or the like.

[Anonymous No.1664196]

>>1664184
He's saying it's a blurry fucking mess and looks terrible.

[Anonymous No.1664204]

>>1664192
>>1664196
Whaaat?
This is honestly the best way to do it if you want dithering to blend.

[Anonymous No.1664232]

>>1664175
Why don't you play indie games if you want pixels?

[Anonymous No.1664240]

>>1664204
There is no good way to artificially blend dithering and there's no reason to do it either. Your eyes and brain will naturally do it.

[Anonymous No.1664247]

>>1664232
Why don't you play vector games if you don't want pixels?
I don't even understand what the size of a publisher has to do with pixels or how it fits into this context. It's not like this filter reduces the amount of pixels even though it looks like it was scaled down and back up again.

[Anonymous No.1664262]

>>1664247

I don't see any pixels on my CRT, sorry.

[Anonymous No.1664274]

>>1664262
Are you using a Vectrex?

[Anonymous No.1664289]

>>1654426
This anon gets it.

[Anonymous No.1664298]

>>1664240
Except they don't, and the developers intended it to be blended or else they wouldn't have put those patterns there.

[Anonymous No.1664301]

>>1664175
Because that's totally wrong. Blurry signals due to low video bandwidth looks nothing like that.

[Anonymous No.1664312]

Obviously, the devs anticipate that their games would be played on emulators with a hi res computer monitor someday so the raw pixels are as the developers intended, as you can see on written messages like place name signs which become magically unreadable when unfiltered.

[Anonymous No.1664351]

>>1664298
They used dithering patterns there because systems could only display a limited amount of colors simultaneously . The human vision will naturally combine adjacent colors. It's a technique commonly found outside of video games as well because limited colors also exist in real life.
These artificial attempts at blending only lead to false positives and general ugliness.

If you look at >>1664162 you will see that it reduces the vertical dithering but amplifies and creates horizontal patterns.
In >>1664160 it kills the colors on the wall.

[Anonymous No.1664358]

>>1664312

[Anonymous No.1664360]

>>1664351
>These artificial attempts at blending only lead to false positives

Not if you do it the right way, which is emulating signal bandwidth. Trying to blend dithering while keeping everything else "pixel perfect" is when you run into false positives.

[Anonymous No.1664368]

>>1664360
What kind of lousy signal do you use that could be capable of blending PC-88 dithering? Not even RF should be capable of that and the thing used analog and digital RGB connectors.

[Anonymous No.1664406]

>>1663797
i just downloaded it to fuck around with these filters, i cant get the piece of shit to work with PSX games and the UI is terrible

[Anonymous No.1664615]

>>1664406
Well it's PSX core needs proper SCPH-550x BIOS dumps, and requires loading games using cue or ccd (which need to be correct and properly formatted). Once you have those things in order, it should work just fine.

I don't see what's wrong with the UI to be honest, it's controller driven and easy to use. I like not having to put down the controller to change games or adjust settings.

[Anonymous No.1664621]

>>1664406
For PSX, you need one of several specific BIOS images.
SCPH-5500/5501/5502.
I was unable to find 5501, but renaming any other BIOS images to the correct name works just fine.

As for the games themselves, you need to have properly configured .CUE sheets, as it's the format the core uses. Linked below is an explanation.
http://emulation-general.wikia.com/wiki/Cue_sheet_%28.cue%29

[Anonymous No.1664637]

Playing on a 3x window solves all dithering problems to me.

[Anonymous No.1664638]

>>1664621
5501 and 7003 are exactly the same hash, so you can use that.

[Anonymous No.1664641]

>>1664351
>kills the colors on the wall
Haha, that's not the filter, the second shot was taken a couple frames later when and the holes on the wall do a little pallette cycling to simulate light flashing.

[Anonymous No.1664642]

>>1664368
Maybe PC-88 wasnt meant to be blended, but Mega Drive transparency dithering certainly was. SNES psuedo hires transparency was meant to be blended as well.

[Anonymous No.1664686]

>>1664642
>certainly
>was meant to be
Do you have a citation on that or are you just projecting?

[Anonymous No.1664689]

>>1664686
Citatation is the real console

[Anonymous No.1664695]

>>1664689
Mega Drive with SCART won't produce that transparency.
Playing an Atari game on a B&W TV will produce a B&W picture but that doesn't mean the games were meant to be B&W.

[Anonymous No.1664701]

>>1664695
Most people didnt use RGB for Mega Drive, they used composite or RF and the games did their transparency dither effects with that in mind.

[Anonymous No.1664727]

>>1664701
Baseless assumptions.

[Anonymous No.1664771]

>>1664727
No more baseless than your assumption that "eyes blend dithering".

I don't know why people argue against Mega Drive transparency dithering intended to be blended when it very obviously was meant to be. I guess they're trying to vindicate their "pixel perfect" fetish by trying to prove that developers always wanted each pixel to be separate and visible.

[Anonymous No.1664792]

>>1664771
That's accepted medical fact. I suggest you seek an optometrist if you have issues with properly interpreting dithering.

[Anonymous No.1664824]

>>1664137
How can you complain about dithering and then slap scan lines all over it?

[Anonymous No.1664869]

>>1664792
Your eye doesn't "interpret" transparency dithering, it looks like a checkerboard without blending. With blending it is a proper transparency.

[Anonymous No.1664885]

Was PSX dithering supposed to be blended? The first time I used S-video I thought my cable was bad because of all the checkerboard patterns.

[Anonymous No.1664925]

>>1664869
What's your viewing distance from the screen and how much do you concentrate on the dithering? I believe you're thinking too much about it.

[Anonymous No.1665016]

>>1664727
Almost nobody outside of Europe used RGB in the early 90s. Most TVs didn't have RGB/component inputs until 2000 or later.

[Anonymous No.1665020]

>>1664925

5 feet or so

[Anonymous No.1665030]

>>1664869
It looks like a checkerboard, it means transparency. I interpret it as transparency as easily as I interpret these weird squiggles you're looking at right now as words.

[Anonymous No.1665036]

Reposting this mode 13h screenshot to prove that dithering was intended to be seen as individual pixels.

[Anonymous No.1665047]

>>1664137

>Wanting composite video blur
Disgusting

[Anonymous No.1665064]

>>1665036
DOS is not the Mega Drive.

[Anonymous No.1665069]

MUH PIXELS

[Anonymous No.1665075]

These threads read exactly like the 30fps vs 60fps, or 720p vs 1080p on /v/.

So essentially what I'm saying is my personal tastes are superior and here's a bunch of technobabble proving why.

[Anonymous No.1665080]

>>1665036
That just proves it looks like ass

[Anonymous No.1665095]

>>1665080
You and your kind don't belong in /vr/. Go to /v/ and masturbate to your MAH GRAFIX shit games.

[Anonymous No.1665098]

>>1665036
Doesn't hold water.

CRT monitors are not TVs.

[Anonymous No.1665101]

Is it acceptable to filter audio? Like adding echo or reverb, or dampening?

No one ever talks about audio

[Anonymous No.1665114]

>>1665036

No one talks about PC games.

[Anonymous No.1665120]

>>1665095
Now that sure was defensive there. I'm just saying checkerboard looks like crap unfiltered. I don't see how that makes me "not belong" on /vr/.

Faggot.

[Anonymous No.1665121]

>>1665064
How is the art style different than Western developed Genesis games?

[Anonymous No.1665128]

>>1665101
I hate SNES interpolation, I always play them with my trebble all the way up for them to sound "right". MAME has SHIT resampling, you can load up a game on something like Final Burn Alpha and compare. Sadly I don't think they will ever fix that.

PS1 and Snes have built in echo that some games use extensively, Star Ocean and Tales of Phantasia on Snes and Vagrant Story and Parasite Eve on PS are good examples.

[Anonymous No.1665134]

>>1665075
Not really, because 60fps is objectively superior to 30fps, and 1080p objectively superior to 720p, but filters are a matter of taste. People who enjoy looking at a blurry mess have poor taste, but we can't say they are objectively wrong.

[Anonymous No.1665136]

Seems like old games must get some artificially pixelation in this age or it will damage your retro-hipster credit.

[Anonymous No.1665146]

>>1665121
>art style

Has nothing to do with this

[Anonymous No.1665154]

>>1665075
You were right on the first sentence, wrong on the second.
It's more
>what I'm saying is my empirical technical facts are superior and here's a bunch of facts proving why.

60FPS is better, period. 1080P is better than 720P and filters for old console games meant to be played on TV is better than raw.

[Anonymous No.1665156]

>>1665134
There you go, you see, you have started it again.
And I wasn't even baiting.

[Anonymous No.1665167]

Here is "muh authenticity" and "muh pixels". What you fail to notice is this deformed midget is supposed to be a human. Who gives a fuck about the filter debate, it all looks like shit anyway.

Now motion quality, that's something worth arguing about. /vr/ games actually do well there. Motion quality is the real reason to use a CRT. Filters won't help you with motion quality.

[Anonymous No.1665168]

>>1665128
>MAME has SHIT resampling

What kind of resampling does it use?
RetroArch has Sinc resampling and MAME core sounds pretty good to me on there.

[Anonymous No.1665181]

>>1665146
Art style has everything to do with the medium used. If blurring was important to the art style then you'd see a different style on platforms (eg. DOS) where blurring didn't happen.

[Anonymous No.1665185]

>>1665167
> Motion quality is the real reason to use a CRT. Filters won't help you with motion quality.
You can use both. I use filters on my CRT.

[Anonymous No.1665189]

>>1665167
nice bait faggot

[Anonymous No.1665194]

>>1665167
>Motion quality is the real reason to use a CRT. Filters won't help you with motion quality.

... if you are talking about the phosphor afterglow, you can get filters that do that sort of shit. Hell, fucking Kawaks had such blur filters ten years ago.

[Anonymous No.1665210]

>>1665194
No, I am not. And if you have obvious phosphor trail your brightness is too high.

Also, the low resolution does harm motion quality for /vr/ games because of uneven movement per frame. A "filter" that actually took into account subpixel information ripped from the game ram could greatly improve motion quality. Verging on engine reimplementation there, could be worth doing. Might as well bump the framerate to 120fps while you're at it.

[Anonymous No.1665214]

>>1665168
I don't how to put it, try running something like Third Strike on Mame and then on Final Burn and tell me what you think.
All I know is they do sound different. Maybe MAME lacks interpolation or something.

[Anonymous No.1665218]

>>1664298
>and the developers intended it to be blended

[Anonymous No.1665226]

>>1665194
>... if you are talking about the phosphor afterglow, you can get filters that do that sort of shit. Hell, fucking Kawaks had such blur filters ten years ago.

He's likely talking about the lack of the phosphor afterglow and how motion isn't blurred silly to shit like on Plasma and LCD displays.

[Anonymous No.1665239]

>>1664298
>and the developers intended it to be blended

You have no proof of that unless you have an actual quote of the devs.

It's like people claiming "retro games were made with CRT in mind". No fucking proof. In the best case, you have a picture of the devs testing their games on a TV. Oh boy, I surely didn't expect them to actually test their games before releasing them!
And I love how people defending that theory go from "dev X made game Y with CRT in mind therefore that means every dev did!". No, that means dev X did that for game Y.

[Anonymous No.1665253]

>>1664240
>Your eyes and brain will naturally do it.
But that's wrong. Not all of us are mostly blind.

[Anonymous No.1665258]

>>1665239
>No fucking proof.

Yeah, they obviously had LCD in their mind.

[Anonymous No.1665259]

>>1665239
Someone already posted as based assumption. Nearly every fucking in existence at least on our side of the pond was implemented in that fashion.You had to physically modify and get special displays to even come close to raw.

[Anonymous No.1665264]

>>1665258
They were obviously using 4K OLEDs from the future despite nothing else existing and the blending working perfectly.
Also, evolution is fake also >>1664298
is angry because scientists are lying to us and shit.

[Anonymous No.1665281]

>>1654426
>Pixel art is designed to look good with visible pixels.

Yeah wrong.

The end result of pixel art wasn't meant to look pixelated because then it completely loses its sense of depth. If you were involved in gaming in the 80s and 90s you'd know this, as games that appeared pixelated were universally mocked both by players, critics in magazines, and developers taking shots at rival companies. "Ugly" and "Blocky" were used to put these games down.
The artists specifically drew their art to take advantage of the subtle smoothing that CRT's offered, giving their art the illusion of depth when displayed correctly. If they were meant to appear pixelated they wouldn't have painstakingly put all those tiny little colour and shading details into their work. They'd just use big simple block designs and straight colours. Every time a new generation of hardware came out, everyone was excited by the slightly higher resolution but more importantly more available colours on screen that artists could use. This was of extreme importance when it came to hiding the blocky/pixelated underbelly of the raw image underneath.

This fascination with pixels is only a recent thing, most probably brought on by the rise of emulators and razor sharp PC monitors. Remember when emulation popped up in the 90s and people saw their favourite childhood games for the first time in a decade or 2? Everyone vomited because of how bad they looked because of the hideous over-pronounced pixelation.

>They are especially clear in mode 13h and mode X DOS games, which are line-doubled, but use the exact same art techniques as used for 240p displays.
That's coz they only had 1 art technique to chose from idiot.

[Anonymous No.1665286]

>>1665253
It's not a matter of eyes, it's all in the brain. Does >>1665167 (either version) look like Mario to you? If so, you are certainly capable of interpreting dithering.

[Anonymous No.1665289]

>>1665253
How do you even read this? Your screen is based on similar techniques where every pixel is divided into red, green and blue parts.
Print works like that as well.
Having a picture that's more than the sum of its part is something you'll regularly find in ordinary life.

[Anonymous No.1665317]

>>1665289
I see it just like you do, smoothly blurred just like this image because our brain naturally blurs all pixels to shit so every individual fucking color is indistinguishable naturally. The way dithered images were meant to be seen, naturally interpreted by our 20/2000 vision.

[Anonymous No.1665319]

>>1665317

[Anonymous No.1665336]

>>1662264
This is because you're using 4:3 aspect ratio. CRT Hylian corrects it, so it looks accurate without losing much sharpness even if you dim the scanlines. Notice how some pixels are distorted on the first image.

[Anonymous No.1665337]

>>1665286
It's definitely not all in the brain, it's all in the natural physics of placing your TV 50 feet away to naturally blur the dithering by lowering the resolution based on light dispersion.
If you actually get the TV anywhere near you. The same way that every pixel looks like a fucking wall when you use a microscope on it. For people actually sitting at their displays at proper distances, the brain does not automatically apply an absurd amount of blurring on very large groupings of pixels next to each other. The very fact that we're all having this argument is definitive proof of that. Because if we all naturally interpolated dithering, no one would ever think to apply filters because they wouldn't be able to fucking identify individual pixels.

[Anonymous No.1665367]

>>1665337
I grew up with DOS games, so I have no problem interpreting dithering and sharp pixels. I never claimed this interpretation is automatic. Blurring enough to hide dithering destroys important visual information, eg. the typewriter keys in Crono's room in CT. It's better to learn to understand it as transparency. Humans are good at this sort of thing, as proved by writing, cartoons, etc.

[Anonymous No.1665431]

>>1665281
>This fascination with pixels is only a recent thing, most probably brought on by the rise of emulators and razor sharp PC monitors. Remember when emulation popped up in the 90s and people saw their favourite childhood games for the first time in a decade or 2? Everyone vomited because of how bad they looked because of the hideous over-pronounced pixelation

This sums it up pretty well. Great post but sadly entirely lost on this board. It's basically a "my nostalgia is better than yours" battle between people raised on emulators and people who had the real thing.

[Anonymous No.1665452]

>>1665319

[Anonymous No.1665470]

>>1665431
Yeah so now that we can actually see exactly how the games looked, we can't just learn to accept and love them for what they are, we have to blur everything back to how it was on our shitty CRTs with RF coaxial cables.

[Anonymous No.1665483]

>>1665470

But that's how they were supposed to look like. And they looked beautiful. At least a lot more beautiful than some pixel holocaust.

[Anonymous No.1665486]

[Anonymous No.1665508]

>>1665483
If it's not what the console outputs then it's not what it was "supposed to look like".

If you want to argue "what the developers intended" then why is Nintendo releasing their own games in nearest neighbor on the WiiU? How come screenshots in magazines like Nintendo Power were always crystal clear and not blurred with scanlines? They were directly taken from the hardware.

[Anonymous No.1665518]

>>1665508
>why is Nintendo releasing their own games in nearest neighbor on the WiiU?

Because they don't give 2 shits.

>How come screenshots in magazines like Nintendo Power were always crystal clear

I don't see any clear pixel on that screenshot.

[Anonymous No.1665527]

>>1665431
Uh, I thought all the SNES games I never got to play looked good then.
NES looked bad mostly because of the over saturated pallette.

[Anonymous No.1665528]

>>1665508
>then why is Nintendo releasing their own games in nearest neighbor on the WiiU?

They also allow hq4x, which means the developers intended smoothing filters.

[Anonymous No.1665532]

>>1665518
Well it's a scan from an old magazine, but you can clearly see they are pure native resolution screenshots.

[Anonymous No.1665537]

>>1665532
if you think anyone is going to say you're right on 4chan...

[Anonymous No.1665542]

>>1665532
Those are even at the correct 4:3 aspect ratio

[Anonymous No.1665551]

>>1665537
Well then tell me why it's not right. You can clearly see it's a native resolution picture. You can clearly see pixels even though it's scanned from an old magazine. Plus Nintendo Power got their screenshots straight from the source. Straight from the devs.

[Anonymous No.1665617]

>>1665551
you want me to tell you how wrong you are?
you realize the one on the right looks 50x better right?

[Anonymous No.1665626]

>>1665617
Of course it does. The one on the left is a scan from a very old magazine as I said. But have a very high quality scan from the Metroid box. Look at those screenshots. I don't see any blurriness or scanlines.

[Anonymous No.1665629]

>>1665617
You're saying the nearest neighbor one looks better...? Way to prove his point

[Anonymous No.1665636]

>>1665626
>I don't see any blurriness or scanlines.

And no pixels for that matter.

[Anonymous No.1665641]

>>1665636
If you're not seeing pixels in that then you're fucking blind.

[Anonymous No.1665646]

>>1665641
I guess you have to believe to see them.

[Anonymous No.1665651]

>>1665646
The image is made of pixels. And it looks nothing like a composite signal. But you've backpedaled so much already that you're literally grasping at straws.

Where's the "developers intended the games to look like CRT blurriness" now? Evidence proves the contrary.

[Anonymous No.1665668]

>>1665651
>Evidence proves the contrary.

That doesn't prove jack shit except that they used capture cards for magazine shots because that looks better than photos of CRTs. It doesn't mean "THIS IS HOW THE DEVELOPERS INTENDED IT TO LOOK" because it wouldn't look like that to 99% of people using standard definition TVs.

[Anonymous No.1665672]

Anyone who thinks emulator output is "what the developers intended" has a mental illness anyway

[Anonymous No.1665675]

>>1665668
Nintendo Power used press release screenshots on previews just like any other magazine in the entire world, which were distributed by publishers which took them from devs. Just like today.

[Anonymous No.1665679]

>>1665651
>The image is made of pixels

No shit. And yet no pixel is individually visible.

>But you've backpedaled so much

You're talking with more than one person.

>literally grasping at straws.

Proverbial, you moron.

>developers intended the games to look like CRT blurriness

You have to be borderline retarded to think otherwise. CRTs were the only damn thing available back then.

[Anonymous No.1665681]

>>1665532
Are you serious? This is blurry shit, obviously taken with a composite signal capture card and further mangled by the magazine publishing process. Anybody serious about gaming saw much higher quality back then.

[Anonymous No.1665691]

>>1665626
Not a scan, a reproduction based on scans. And only one screenshot is big enough to examine closely, and it looks very strange. The top of the lava is especially suspicious. I'm pretty sure the whole thing is hand drawn like the SMB1 boxart.

This however is good evidence that the pixels were intended to be clear.

[Anonymous No.1665704]

>>1665691

>This however is good evidence that the pixels were intended to be clear.

Of course they're supposed to be clear, but they're not supposed to be big huge 5x scale squares that some emulator users insist on claiming is "the only true way"

[Anonymous No.1665710]

[Anonymous No.1665720]

Supposedly this is a new retroarch filter that should be coming out in a short while.

The glow/curve/borders should be configurable as well.

[Anonymous No.1665725]

[Anonymous No.1665727]

>>1665704
Here's what I use. 3x nearest followed by bilinear. About as sharp as a top quality CRT with RGB connection, and no ugly scanlines (it's weird how the dithering haters love scanlines, when scanlines are far worse an artifact because they don't even have meaning).

[Anonymous No.1665731]

>people actually want their emulators to look like shitty 1980s televisions

[Anonymous No.1665734]

>>1665727
>they don't even have meaning

Sure they do - to keep graphics from looking like a blocky/blurry mess.

[Anonymous No.1665737]

>>1665734
No, it's a simple artifact of the hack used to display 240p on a 480i CRT. They do nothing to make the image clearer.

[Anonymous No.1665748]

>>1665725
i like this filter

[Anonymous No.1665753]

>>1665704
>big huge 5x scale squares

True Authentic Gaming Experience™.

[Anonymous No.1665763]

What shaders do for me and my 31khz CRT in ultrawide 480p mode.

[Anonymous No.1665772]

>>1665763
Is that the romhack where you're forced to fight boom boom every single stage, repeatedly through the whole game?

[Anonymous No.1665773]

[Anonymous No.1665776]

>>1665737
No it makes it look better. Believe me, I've tried both native 240p and line doubled 240p and native just looks better to me. Line doubled only looks good with horizontal blur, otherwise it's too blocky.

[Anonymous No.1665791]

>>1665776
>too blocky
All display methods are equally blocky. The underlying pixels are the same. Filters can only distort and blur those pixels, which suggests you don't actually like pixel art.

[Anonymous No.1665795]

>>1665773
teach me how to do this

[Anonymous No.1665802]

>>1665772
Yeah. It only gets bad when there's more than one, where jumping on both at the same time hurts you, and if you kill one without killing the other you don't want to pick up the item he drops because you won't be able to move but the other is still active until the screen fades.

It's still a great hack with excellent level design and fairly challenging gameplay, though.

[Anonymous No.1665812]

>>1665791
>don't actually like pixel art.

Yeah, I dont fetishize art with humongous pixels. I prefer a coherent image not unlike what the real consoles produce.

[Anonymous No.1665819]

>>1665812
>with humongous pixels
That depends only on the display size (and overscan/borders). Filters can't change that.

[Anonymous No.1665829]

>>1665819
Filters can hide aliasing

[Anonymous No.1665836]

>>1665829
Pixel art is based around exploiting aliasing to give the illusion of higher resolution. Hiding it is missing the point.

[Anonymous No.1665845]

>>1665791
>All display methods are equally blocky

You have no idea what you're talking about. CRT TVs displayed pixels as dots of light, almost never anwhere close to hard square shapes.

You'd know this if you weren't underaged

[Anonymous No.1665847]

>>1665773
seriously how do you do this?
i've made it this far
https://github.com/libretro/RetroArch

[Anonymous No.1665853]

>>1665836
>Pixel art is based around exploiting aliasing to give the illusion of higher resolution

"Pixel art" is something the retro hipster movement come up with. Back in the day it was just called "graphics" and we didnt give a shit about "pixels".

[Anonymous No.1665873]

>>1665845
The information content is the same, unless you destroy some of it with filters. Filters cannot add information.

>>1665853
>Back in the day it was just called "graphics"
Obviously, because the only technology capable of anything different (vector monitors) was too rare to be worth mentioning. Now we have the technology for a great diversity of art styles, so "pixel art" is a useful term.

[Anonymous No.1665909]

>>1665873
The idea that "pixel art" is somthing holy and that filters "desecrate" it is what annoys me. Nobody really cared about this back then. Nowadays if you play it in emulators with an upscaling method other than one that results in perfect squares gets people yelling at you for "ruining pixel art". Who fucking cares really? People should just use what they think looks good even if it "ruins the pixel art"

[Anonymous No.1665914]

>>1665909
It's not "holy", it's not even "art" in the sense of "games as art". But if you think filters make it look better, maybe you are fooling yourself that you like it at all.

[Anonymous No.1665916]

>pixel art

I keep hearing that word. Is that the new hip thing on tumblr or something? Don't bring your anachronistic shit into retro games.

[Anonymous No.1665925]

>>1665916
It's the shortest possible name for the style, so it's not going anywhere. And of course the name is modern, it only became needed in modern times (see >>1665873).

[Anonymous No.1665935]

>>1665914
>But if you think filters make it look better, maybe you are fooling yourself that you like it at all.

They can and do, since nearest neighbor is rarely optimal despite what pixel purists might claim.

[Anonymous No.1665981]

>>1665720
Looks like shit

[Anonymous No.1665998]

>>1665981
Just like the devs intended.

[Anonymous No.1666006]

>>1665998
I think the real problem, with me at least, is that I never grew up with those kinds of CRTs. I always played using very sharp shadowmask CRTs where scanlines are barely noticiable. S-Video specially looks very crisp and defined.

[Anonymous No.1666020]

i'm about play dennis the menace on snes.
what filter do you recommend that will make it look like it did in the 90s?

[Anonymous No.1666028]

>>1666020
I recomend buying a tube tv or playing on a window.

Cheap, non-autistic, effective.

[Anonymous No.1666038]

>>1666028
i'm more looking for options that don't include me searching for and purchasing a tv at 11pm
and/or having to make/find room for a new television setup
>definitely not autistic advise

[Anonymous No.1666072]

>>1666020
sharpen or waterpaint

[Anonymous No.1666076]

>>1665847
Download Retroarch from libretro.com.
Go to Settings > Video Options > Shader Options, set Shader Passes to 1 or more.
You are then given the option to select a CRT filter. There should be a whole folder labeled "CRT". Pick one that looks nice.
Unfortunately, the one that guy posted hasn't been released yet so you'll never get that exact image

[Anonymous No.1666079]

>>1666020
CRT Geom is the only filter you ever need.

[Anonymous No.1666087]

>>1666038
Play windowed, or buy a crt.

[Anonymous No.1666090]

>>1666076
>libretro.com.
thanks
would you recommend the current version or something else?

[Anonymous No.1666096]

>>1666090
Not him but yeah, get the latest official release 1.0.0.2

[Anonymous No.1666105]

hooking up some gameboy games on my big HD tv lol what do you think

[Anonymous No.1666113]

just like mom's old tv

[Anonymous No.1666116]

I get each point.
There's no right or wrong answer in personal preferences.

[Anonymous No.1666127]

>>1666113

[Anonymous No.1666131]

>>1666113
Doesn't look like 4:3 ratio.

[Anonymous No.1666137]

>pixaleted or blurry
>implying you have to choose

[Anonymous No.1666151]

>>1666137
You need the perfect CRT feel

[Anonymous No.1666258]

>>1665720
All those tiny little dots look retarded, especially the red ones in the text. CRTs do not have that kind of definition, a red dot that bright would be much blurrier.

[Anonymous No.1666260]

>>1665731
>>people actually want their emulators to look like shitty 1980s televisions

CRTs are great and completely blow every single LCD shader out of the water.

Most of the blur and low quality comes from cables. A shadowmask with s-video or an aperture grille tv with rgb are very clear. Most people used RF cables or composite.

[Anonymous No.1666273]

>>1666260
That's not why people do this though.

I do it because these games were meant to be played on tube tvs. They look pixelated like shit on LCDs, and crt/tube tvs add artificial detail that no smoothing filter alone could ever produce.

I want my defined colors, scanlines, and glow between contrasting areas. It's how the games were meant to be played. Besides, pixelated text is usually incredibly hard to read IMO. NTSC/scanline filters help so fucking much in that regard

[Anonymous No.1666361]

>>1666273
Then get a CRT because CRT shaders are fucking awful.

[Anonymous No.1666364]

>>1665486
looks awful

[Anonymous No.1666367]

>>1666364
Just like the developers intended

[Anonymous No.1666370]

>there are people who get legitimately mad that people use shaders within emulators

How?
Why?

[Anonymous No.1666375]

>>1666370
Everyone enjoys laying some bait. But should you bite? That's the real question here

[Anonymous No.1666426]

>>1659373
>Not praying to the spherical gods
>The glorious gods of GameSphere
>SPHERICAL

[Anonymous No.1666435]

>>1660735
Think about something
How old are indie devs? They're usually in their twenties or thirties, yeah?
Emulation came into stride like twenty years ago; a lot of these indie devs were introduced to retro games through emulators or watching let's plays which would display without CRT stuff anyway. That's why pixel art makes so much sense to people: Millions of people were introduced to retro games through emulators

[Anonymous No.1666442]

>>1666435
consider that worldwide a lot of people also can't into pc at all and just download crappy click&run emulators that display raw pixelated messes, which contributes to the general belief the old games were supposed to look like that

[Anonymous No.1666449]

>>1666435
http://kayin.pyoko.org/?p=2598

[Anonymous No.1666450]

>>1665873
Vector art was still a thing on raster displays. Digitized photos, drawings and videos were also used.

[Anonymous No.1666456]

>>1666442
>raw pixelated messes
I can't believe I'm reading this on this board.

[Anonymous No.1666459]

>>1666449
>http://kayin.pyoko.org/?p=2598
that guy is just retarded and probably angry because he got told in here, so he went to rant about his shitty indie dev pixels somewhere else

[Anonymous No.1666462]

I just use this. I never had a great tv or rgb so it looks alright to me.

[Anonymous No.1666463]

>>1665691
>I'm pretty sure the whole thing is hand drawn like the SMB1 boxart.
I believe those were paper cutouts.

[Anonymous No.1666467]

>>1666459
He's the author of I Wanna Be The Guy.

[Anonymous No.1666468]

>>1666462
Looks like ass, you're not even correcting it to 4:3

[Anonymous No.1666470]

>>1666459
He saw an image on 4Chan and talked about how he "grew up" seeing retro games as pixels and how that led to a different experience than his friends had, then goes on to argue against filterfags and people who rant over indie games not being accurate to older hardware, such as Megaman 10.
He's not ranting or angry at all, you just have a negative predisposition.

[Anonymous No.1666491]

>>1666468
How do I do that? I'm not too familiar with RA.

[Anonymous No.1666496]

>>1666470
How do games like Megaman 9 fit into the whole "as the old developers intended" and "new developers grew up with emulators" rhetoric?

[Anonymous No.1666505]

>>1666496
Get some reading comprehension, retard.
>people who rant over indie games not being accurate to older hardware, such as Megaman 10.

[Anonymous No.1666512]

>>1666468

that guy has nothing on me, this is how i actually play when i am a little far from my monitor

[Anonymous No.1666515]

>>1666505
I understand what you were saying but I'm curious on how people see the issue. Megaman 9 and 10 involved some of the original developers so they should know how their games looked and how they were meant to be seen.

[Anonymous No.1666519]

>>1666515
Well people got angry over it initially with Megaman 9 because the game was obviously designed to look like a nes game but stuff like the colors in Galaxy Man's stage or the magnet platforms that spun you around would be impossible in nes hardware
And yes, I know that there's a de-make for MM9, but a lot was changed in order to fit the parameters of the nes

[Anonymous No.1666521]

Why on earth is this thread still here? This shit is flame bait. Can we go back to being bros and loving old games?

[Anonymous No.1666523]

>>1666470
>you just have a negative predisposition.
yes i always expect the worst

[Anonymous No.1666525]

I've never cared because I first played retro games on a CRT from like 2000 that barely had any blurriness that distracted from the pixels

[Anonymous No.1666527]

>>1666519
They weren't angry because it didn't have scanlines or terrible blurriness?

[Anonymous No.1666529]

>>1666527
like I meme-arrowed:
>people who rant over indie games not being accurate to older hardware, such as Megaman 10
I'm talking about stuff that's technically impossible, not "inaccurate" in terms of scanlines and such
I don't remember any controversy over that kind of stuff

[Anonymous No.1666636]

>>1665218
That's true though.

[Anonymous No.1666640]

>>1664351
>>1665218
>>1665239
Check this out, you dummies
http://www.bogost.com/games/a_television_simulator.shtml

[Anonymous No.1666653]

>>1666640
VCS games were supposed to have more distinguishable pixels than emulators display? That changes everything.

[Anonymous No.1666682]

>>1665239
>>1665218
Dummies

[Anonymous No.1666693]

>>1666682
both look acceptable

[Anonymous No.1666714]

>>1666682
Got the other versions for comparison?
I feel like the dithering helps keep the borders diffuse and gradual.

[Anonymous No.1666774]

So much bullshit in this thread. How blurry your image was depended on your TV, the cables, how old your console was and other shit. To even suggest anyone would use vastly different image flaws as a technique is ridiculous. Nobody intended the games to look like shit.

Video game magazine prints are the closest you could get to what the developers intended you to see - clear, crisp pixels. When I discovered emulation I was happy that I could finally play the games like they were intended to be played, without scanline bullshit or other flaws.

[Anonymous No.1666795]

>>1666774
B-but anoooon... I had a piece of shit garage-sale television growing up so clearly the game was -meant- to look like this!

[Anonymous No.1666804]

>>1666774
Developers also expected you to have regular breaks with 10 minute loading times. It's blasphemy and bad for your health to remove that.

[Anonymous No.1666806]

>>1666774
dithering proves otherwise you dick.

[Anonymous No.1666810]

>>1665239
>It's like people claiming "retro games were made with CRT in mind". No fucking proof.
Also, there is no proof that games were made with controllers in mind. Or that games were meant to be played at all. Purchased, yes, but played? Where's the fucking proof?

[Anonymous No.1666815]

>>1666806
What about dithering? When talking about dithering and pixel art there's no way around the PC98 and its predecessor, the PC88. Both had relatively high resolution but a low amount of colors and made extensive use of dithering and a fitting computer monitor would preserve most of that. The PC88 has so strong dithering that not even heavy image degradation can get rid of it.

[Anonymous No.1666816]

This thread reminds me, on Samurai Shodown 2 the dithering is pretty fucking noticeable both on console ports hooked to tube tvs AND the original arcade cabinet screens.
Seriously, you can't get any more authentic than the fucking ctr screen hooked up to the same arcade machine the devs worked on.

[Anonymous No.1666818]

>>1666816
That's not dithering, that's a ninja shirt.

[Anonymous No.1666820]

>>1666818

[Anonymous No.1666824]

>>1666806
>>1666815
Dithering is also used extensively on Gameboy/Gamegear games, with clear pixels.

[Anonymous No.1666825]

>>1666818
>>1666820
I know what that is, but his arms are also dithered. It's difficult to see in motion but it's definitely there.
Stuff like the fog clouds in nicotine stage is also pretty fuckign noticeable on a ctr, they did a little animation trick where the transparent and the solid pixels would switch/cycle each frame so it's less distracting, but it's definitely there if you look closely.
If you ever have the chance to try out a Neo Geo or Capcom board, they all make extensive use of dithering to simulate transparency. It never looked quite right, so they changed it to real transparency on the console ports.

[Anonymous No.1666827]

>>1666640
It's too bad that simulator is terrible and doesn't accurately simulate CRTs at all.
CRTs had far less afterglow, the texture is just made up shit and was never like that. Old CRT TVs are actually fairly clear just low resolution.
It's almost as if the person had never used a CRT TV before.

[Anonymous No.1666830]

>>1664298

THE ONLY THING THE DEVS INTENDED WAS TO GET RICH BY THE PEOPLE BUYING THEIR GAMES YOU HUMONGOUS PIECE OF FUCKING SHIT

FUCK YOU

[Anonymous No.1666836]

>there are people who think dithering was used with blurry TVs in mind

Hahaha oh wow

[Anonymous No.1666842]

>>1666435
>Emulation came into stride like twenty years ago;
No it didn't.
Emulation came into it's 'stride' around ten years ago at least. The first usable console emulators were being released in late 95 and they 'usable' in 1997 and really we're talking rather minimally and poorly done, that's not a stride that's a beginning of an era. Emulators have only really become fairly decent around 2007-2010. They started getting better around 2003-2005. Twenty years ago was 1994. Shit was slow back then.

[Anonymous No.1666846]

>>1665508
>If you want to argue "what the developers intended" then why is Nintendo releasing their own games in nearest neighbor on the WiiU?

Oh so when devs slap HQ3X on emulated shit that's what they 'intended.'
Also, no one gives a shit about Nintendo's VC emulation and their 'intentions' to make a quick buck by stealing emulators and shipping roms for cash.

[Anonymous No.1666848]

>>1666842
I'd say 15 years. That's when emulators for contemporary system like the PS1 came out.
They may not have been great but it was a major achievement and lawsuits helped to bring them into the spotlight.

[Anonymous No.1666851]

>>1666827
You're just making shit up, each brand of tvs had different phosphor afterglow and that could be influeced by user settings such as saturation and the luminosity of the room the tv is sitting at.

Even my LCD looks like it has afterglow if I turn off the lights and tune down contrast.

[Anonymous No.1666854]

>>1666848
Bleem was fucking terrible and PSX emulation is still somewhat spotty.
Just because they came out didn't mean they were good.
That's like saying golden age comics were when they hit their stride when in fact they were horribly written and awful as fuck.
Those original emulators were garbage.

[Anonymous No.1666857]

>>1666851
My old LCD had burn in. If I played certain games too long the UI would linger on the screen for quite a while.

[Anonymous No.1666858]

>>1666851
Virtually no one in existence had afterglow that terrible.

>Even my LCD looks like it has afterglow if I turn off the lights and tune down contrast.

NO FUCKING SHIT SHERLOCK. LCDS ARE WORSE THAN CRTS FOR MOTION. HOLY FUCKING SHIT.

[Anonymous No.1666860]

>>1666857
Cool story, how's that even remotely related?
I actually meant computer lcd monitor, whatever you call these.

[Anonymous No.1666861]

>>1666854
Maybe we have different understanding of the phrase "came into stride". Video game emulators started to pop up 20 years ago and five years later they had become fairly popular.

[Anonymous No.1666863]

>>1666860
Clearly developers expected us to have burn in and therefore we should use a filter that simulate it for modern displays.
There is no big difference between LCD TVs and LCD monitors.

[Anonymous No.1666864]

>>1666861
Nesticle for example was the best of the early emulators released in 1997, it was unplayable slow shit with awful sound replication and buggy.

[Anonymous No.1666867]

>>1666864
Did it stop people from using it? A certain SNES emulator is still popular even though it's long been deprecated and surpassed.

[Anonymous No.1666870]

>>1666863
Well, samsho had quite visible dithering all the time. Even I could tell it was there when I was 12.

And the ctr screen that came built in with these boards are the same they used to develop for and the same I remember from the early 2000s.
I don't care what you spergs say anymore, to me this discussion is .
There's a mizuki or amakuza special that did a huge dithered background sphere, looked like total ass even back then, hahaha. I'll see if I can find.

[Anonymous No.1666872]

>>1666870

[Anonymous No.1666874]

>>1666867
>Did it stop people from using it?
Yes. Because it was fucking terrible.

>A certain SNES emulator is still popular even though it's long been deprecated and surpassed.
And it's pretty fucking awful too. Yet even for as deprecated as it, that was still fairly as recent as 2011. Personally I avoid the shit out of it because the sound is poor and the video scaling is broken. Though some versions have configurable blarrgs which would be nice if the the emulator wasn't fairly crap. So when you talk about getting into stride, remember that it's main competitor there also happened to be released in 1997 and it's still being worked on today. It's taken at least the majority of the last fifteen years to even become decent. A lot of emulators aside from a handful of popular ones are still really buggy and left obsolete.

[Anonymous No.1666875]

>>1666872
Also the menu and splash screens from SF Alpha 3, all fake dithered transparency.

[Anonymous No.1666884]

>>1666867
Also that question is stupid because you're ignoring what a fucking stride is.

get into one's stride
1. Lit. [for a runner] to reach a comfortable and efficient pace.
2. Fig. to reach one's most efficient and productive rate of doing something.

You know what's not the most efficient, productive, comfortable pacing. Stumbling around at the beginning of attempting something, like say developing shoddy programs.

I'm not suggesting there not be appreciation for early work, everyone has to do it, but neither the quality nor the development rate for improvements were 'in stride' then.
Bleem, one of the examples given was released in 1999, epsxe in 2000, it was meh around 2003 and only got decent by 1.7 in 2008, Pete's OGL2 was even released in 08 which is the standard for any non soft base. It's audio still leaves something to be desired as we well as video and it has it's share of bugs, but largely emulation improvements have been '06-08' where they've been picking up.
Most of the emulation have gotten into a comfortable enough position where they're in a generally mediocre/decent state after 06', for pretty much all the systems across the board.

[Anonymous No.1666886]

Fucking filters

[Anonymous No.1666894]

>>1666884
Xbox emulation started in 2003 and it still stuck there.

[Anonymous No.1666901]

>>1665258
>>1665264
You know what I meant. I meant you have no proof they made the games according to how CRTs change the picture. Or at least, you may have proof for a few games, at best

[Anonymous No.1666907]

>>1666884
We're looking at the issue from different angles. I'm concentrating on the time when emulation became a widespread phenomenon while you're looking at the time when emulators became fully functional.
The initial discussion was about "indie devs" first experiencing retro games via emulation and they shouldn't have cared about how shitty the emulation actually was.

[Anonymous No.1667174]

>>1666886
I want a filter to play like this.

[Anonymous No.1667320]

>>1666491
Pretty late but it's under Video settings, there's aspect ratio or something like that. You're probably using 1:1 PAR. You want to leave it at Core Provided.

[Anonymous No.1667334]

So, apparently will Squarepusher will add filters in the upcoming RA release. At least I'm glad. Shaders are way cooler, but my crappy gpu can't handle them.

[Anonymous No.1667385]

>>1666795
I would play that game

[Anonymous No.1667439]

>>1666435
>>1666442

The filthy CRT filter scum showing their true colors

[Anonymous No.1667449]

>>1667439

I'm sorry that you never experienced the glory of retro games in their native environment, son.

[Anonymous No.1667539]

Can anyone tell me what's the optimal aspect ratio for Genesis games? "Core Provided" seems to have then at 4:3. But most games I have here like Sonic 2 are actually wider than that at 1:1 resolution since they're 320x224.

[Anonymous No.1669476]

Filters look good with a prescale

[Anonymous No.1670018]

>>1667539
Correct ratio for Megadrive games is 4:3

[Anonymous No.1670786]

[Anonymous No.1670824]

>>1670786
As nature intended.

[Anonymous No.1671336]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?

No. I'll play retro games until CRTs die out. When that day comes I'll hang up the controller for good.

[Anonymous No.1671337]

>>1656114
How can you not have the space for one 19" TV? Or oven a 13" if you live in a dorm or something like it.

[Anonymous No.1671409]

>>1654413
>Will there ever be a good filter that /vr/ will accept?

Trinitron aperture mask filter.

However, that would require a 4k display.

[Anonymous No.1671415]

>>1671409
How long until 4K monitors get a refresh rate over 60 Hz?

[Anonymous No.1671426]

>>1661035
I'd play a game in this style.

[Anonymous No.1671448]

>>1665679
>>The image is made of pixels
>No shit. And yet no pixel is individually visible.
Therefore, no image is visible

[Anonymous No.1671457]

>curvature filters

All my why?

[Anonymous No.1671467]

>making games look intentionally shitty

[Anonymous No.1671560]

>muh invisible CRT pixels
They were clearly visible, your tvs were just tiny.

[Anonymous No.1671586]

You faggots are fucking retarded if you think the Saturn didn't have visible AS HELL pixelated dithering.
9 out of 10 magazine reviews pointed out the lack of actual transparency as one of the reasons why the sat was so inferior to the playstation.

[Anonymous No.1671595]

>>1671586

[Anonymous No.1671601]

>>1671586
>>1671595
If I recall right, they called this fake dotted transparency thing as "texture stencils".

[Anonymous No.1671616]

>>1671586
What was the first video game (system) to feature alpha transparency?

[Anonymous No.1671619]

>>1671586
you're rigth
then again nobody plays saturn for the 3d stuff

[Anonymous No.1671660]

>>1671616
I believe it was the PlayStation, however I could be wrong. It was developed in the 1980s and was possible with 32-bit processing, so it could have potentially been sooner.

[Anonymous No.1671689]

What would be the best filter to achieve a proper dither-translucency effect?
I've tried introducing horizontal blur and it does one of two things depending on other filters used.
It either softens the pixels but leaves the checkerboard in tact, or it's too powerful.

[Anonymous No.1671714]

>>1671689
Get used to it.

[Anonymous No.1671720]

>>1671619
2D games can use transparency.

[Anonymous No.1672931]

>>1671616
SNES

[Anonymous No.1672934]

>>1671689
NTSC

[Anonymous No.1673060]

>>1671689
I figured it out. I put a horizontal blur under my crt-genom shader. Worked perfectly.

>>1672934
Oddly enough, I wasn't getting the right effect at 3x res. I like the NTSC filter, but it doesn't do dither-based translucency right.